X Close

Why doesn’t Britain regret lockdown? Three years on, voters remain in favour

The mea culpas will never arrive (ANDY BUCHANAN/AFP via Getty Images)

The mea culpas will never arrive (ANDY BUCHANAN/AFP via Getty Images)


March 23, 2023   5 mins

“In retrospect, lockdowns were a mistake.”

If you agree with the above statement, you are, I’m afraid, still in the minority. Three years to the day since Britain brought in its first nationwide lockdown, the latest wave of UnHerd Britain polling shows that only 27% of voters agree that lockdowns were a mistake, while 54% disagree and 19% are not sure. The strength of feeling also tilts in the other direction: fully 30% of people strongly disagree with the statement, while only 12% strongly agree.

Having estimated results for all 632 constituencies in Britain, our partners Focaldata could not find a single seat where the “lockdown sceptics” outnumber the “pro-lockdowners.” Chorley in Lancashire and Leeds Central are the closest thing to sceptical enclaves (here, supporters of lockdowns outnumber opponents by a single percentage point) but it is still a minority position. If “defenders of lockdown” were a political party,  it would sweep the nation in a landslide.

To those of us at the coalface of interrogating the wisdom of lockdowns for the past three years, it is a bitter pill to swallow. As someone who counts himself among the 12% of voters who strongly agree with the statement, allow me to tell you what life is like inside this embattled minority.

To the majority of people who believe lockdowns were right and necessary, the Covid era was no doubt distressing, but it need not have been cause to re-order their perception of the world. Faced with a new and frightening disease, difficult decisions were taken by the people in charge but we came together and got through it; mistakes were made, but overall we did what we needed to do.

For the dissenting minority, the past three years have been very different. We have had to grapple with the possibility that, through panic and philosophical confusion, our governing class contrived to make a bad situation much worse. Imagine living with the sense that the manifold evils of the lockdowns that we all now know — ripping up centuries-old traditions of freedom, interrupting a generation’s education, hastening the decline into decrepitude for millions of older people, destroying businesses and our health service, dividing families, saddling our economies with debt, fostering fear and alienation, attacking all the best things in life — needn’t have happened for anything like so long, if at all?

To those who place emphasis on good quality evidence, it has been particularly exasperating. In the early days of 2020, we had only intuitions — there was no real data as to whether lockdowns worked, as they had never been tried in this way. As millions tuned in to our in-depth interviews on UnHerdTV with leading scientists, we made sure to hear arguments in favour of lockdowns as well as against. Devi Sridhar made the case for Zero Covid; Susan Michie said we should be locking down even harder; Neil Ferguson (whose last-ever tweet was a link to his UnHerd interview) told me how exciting it was that the world was attempting to stop a highly infectious disease in its tracks.

There were periods when the evidence looked like it was going the other way, such as Sweden’s worse-than-expected second wave in winter 2020-21. Professor Fredrik Elgh dramatically predicted disaster for that country, which ultimately didn’t transpire — but he had me worried.

In the past year, however, we have for the first time been able to look at the Covid data in the round. Many of the countries which appeared to be doing “well” in terms of low levels of infections and deaths caught up in the second year — Norway ended up much closer to Sweden, while countries such as Hungary, which were initially praised for strong early lockdowns, have ended up with some of the worst death tolls in the world. Due to the peculiarly competitive nature of the lockdowns, the results were neatly tracked, allowing clear comparison between countries and regions. While we spent the first year arguing about deaths “with” Covid as opposed to deaths “from” Covid, all sides in this discussion have now settled on overall “excess deaths” as the fairest measure of success or failure: in other words, overall, how many more people died in a particular place than you would normally expect?

My view on these results is quite simple: in order to justify a policy as monumental as shutting down all of society for the first time in history, the de minimis outcome must be a certainty that fewer people died because of it. Lockdown was not one “lever” among many: it was the nuclear option. The onus must be on those who promoted lockdowns to produce a table showing a clear correlation between the places that enacted mandatory shutdowns and their overall outcome in terms of excess deaths. But there is no such table; there is no positive correlation. Three years after, there is no non-theoretical evidence that lockdowns were necessary to save lives. This is not an ambiguous outcome; it is what failure looks like.

If anything, the correlation now looks like it goes the other way. The refusal of Sweden to bring in a lockdown, and the neighbouring Scandinavian countries’ shorter and less interventionist lockdowns and swifter return to normality, provide a powerful control to the international experiment. Three years on, these countries are at the bottom of the European excess deaths league table, and depending on which method you choose, Sweden is either at or very near the very bottom of the list. So the countries that interfered the least with the delicately balanced ecosystem of their societies caused the least damage; and the only European country to eschew mandatory lockdowns altogether ended up with the smallest increase in loss of life. It’s a fatal datapoint for the argument that lockdowns were the only option.

So why, three years on, do most people not share this conclusion? Partly because most people haven’t seen the evidence. Nor will they. The media and political establishment were so encouraging of lockdowns at the time that their only critique was that they weren’t hard enough. They are hardly going to acknowledge such a grave mistake now. Nor do I expect the inquiry to ask the right questions: obfuscation and distraction will continue and mea culpas will never arrive.

But it can’t all be put down to the media. Over that strange period, we were reminded of something important about human nature: when frightened, people will choose security over freedom. Endless opinion polls confirmed it, and politicians acted upon it. Tellingly, those constituencies most in favour of lockdowns in our polling are leafy and affluent — New Forest West, Bexhill, Henley, The Cotswolds. Perhaps some people even enjoyed it.

Meanwhile, the dissenting minority is not going anywhere. This new class of citizen is now a feature of every Western society: deeply distrustful of authority, sceptical of the “narrative”, hungry for alternative explanations, inured to being demonised and laughed at. The dissident class skews young (it includes 39% of 25-34 year olds) and clusters around poorer inner-city neighbourhoods; it heads to alternative media channels for information. Its number was greatly increased over the lockdown era as those people lost faith in the way the world is run. They will continue to make their presence felt in the years to come.

As for me, the past three years have changed how I view the world. I feel no anger, simply a wariness: an increased sense of how fragile our liberal way of life is, how precarious its institutions and principles, and how good people, including those I greatly admire, are capable of astonishing misjudgements given the right atmosphere of fear and moral panic. In particular those years revealed the dark side of supposedly enlightened secular rationalism — how, if freed from its moorings, it can tend towards a crudely mechanistic world in which inhuman decisions are justified to achieve dubious measurable targets.

I hope there is no “next time”, and that the political class will never again think nationwide lockdowns are a proper policy option in a liberal democracy. But if they do, I suspect the opposition, while still perhaps a minority, will be better organised.


Freddie Sayers is the Editor-in-Chief & CEO of UnHerd. He was previously Editor-in-Chief of YouGov, and founder of PoliticsHome.

freddiesayers

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

476 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kevin Hamann
Kevin Hamann
1 year ago

Sadly it is the same in Canada. Unherd is the only online platform i pay for. Keep fighting the good fight Freddie.

Jim R
Jim R
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

Same here – the only good thing to come out of this madness for me was discovering unherd and lockdown sceptics (and Brett Weinstein etc). Canada is a hopeless wasteland of timid conformity and i might have lost my mind without access to other viewpoints. Soon Trudeau will fully implement his censorship regime and when I type “unherd” into my browser i will get redirected to the CBC. I will miss you all.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

It is very simple…. a lot of Brits did not experience the financial impact of lockdowns during the lockdown and don’t seem to have the wherewithal to link things up now. Maybe also didn’t have the imagination and curiosity and thirst for knowledge to see the societal impacts and other harms? Also imo the population is too invested in the nanny state. Show me the people who lost their livelihoods who supported this travesty.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lesley van Reenen
Lindsay S
Lindsay S
1 year ago

There was also a lot of mocking of people who were against lockdowns, those who have since been vindicated. Many people do not like to admit they were so wrong when they were so vocal about being right.
Everything that we have known for centuries about building resistance and immunity was said to be wrong and those who wanted to cling to those practises were mocked as tin foil hat wearing. Everything about lockdown and and the excessive use of sanitiser undermined resistance and immunity and yet it was lorded as the most honourable of practises!
If you were opposed to lockdowns and masks then you were a granny killer! If you pointed out the negative impact on the economy then you were a sociopath putting wealth before health. Some people were under the hysterical delusion that lockdowns, masks and social distancing could stop people from dying altogether!
It was utter nonsense from day one.

tom j
tom j
1 year ago
Reply to  Lindsay S

Lindsay you are right, though I’d say those first few weeks we didn’t know what we were dealing with – in fact in the UK people ‘locked down’ before the government asked them to. But by summer 2020 we knew enough, people were not scared of the disease but we ceded control to the most anxious and bureaucratic forces in the country.

Martin Adams
Martin Adams
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

by summer 2020 we knew enough, people were not scared of the disease but we ceded control to the most anxious and bureaucratic forces in the country.

Well said. It reminds me of Alexis de Tocqueville who nearly 200 years ago, in Democracy in America, warned about the growth of bureaucracy in democratic countries, which would lead to what he called “soft despotism”. It would be, in many respects, worse than the despotism of absolute monarchy because you had no head to cut off, and people would be seduced by it into believing it was inherently beneficial.
Of course, one can always make the comparison with countries such as China, where tyrannical rule produced lockdowns that would be far worse than those in Europe. But the crucial point is that, as Freddie’s article points out, the ostensibly democratic background produces the delusion that government decisions are inevitably made in the best interests of the people.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

In Nov 2019 when I had covid, my only lockdown was to NOT visit my elderly relatives in care-homes. No Granny’s died thanks to that – at least they didn’t show up in ANY way in my family or associated friends NOR did they show up in any mortality figures. It would be interesting to investigate further why so many countries all had their mortality spike around the same time in 2020 AND what that coincided with? (Emptying hospitals into care homes and intubation of victims perhaps?)

Dominic English
Dominic English
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Yes Tom. But by then the voters, egged on by a shrill, hysterical media were already whipped into a sort of panic. No UK government could have abandoned the lockdown policy at that point. They would have been hounded out of office. Absolutely tragic. And the hangover is voters seem desperate for ever more government intervention in their lives. https://open.substack.com/pub/lowstatus/p/the-government-is-rubbish-more-please?r=evzeq&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Martin Adams
Martin Adams
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

by summer 2020 we knew enough, people were not scared of the disease but we ceded control to the most anxious and bureaucratic forces in the country.

Well said. It reminds me of Alexis de Tocqueville who nearly 200 years ago, in Democracy in America, warned about the growth of bureaucracy in democratic countries, which would lead to what he called “soft despotism”. It would be, in many respects, worse than the despotism of absolute monarchy because you had no head to cut off, and people would be seduced by it into believing it was inherently beneficial.
Of course, one can always make the comparison with countries such as China, where tyrannical rule produced lockdowns that would be far worse than those in Europe. But the crucial point is that, as Freddie’s article points out, the ostensibly democratic background produces the delusion that government decisions are inevitably made in the best interests of the people.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

In Nov 2019 when I had covid, my only lockdown was to NOT visit my elderly relatives in care-homes. No Granny’s died thanks to that – at least they didn’t show up in ANY way in my family or associated friends NOR did they show up in any mortality figures. It would be interesting to investigate further why so many countries all had their mortality spike around the same time in 2020 AND what that coincided with? (Emptying hospitals into care homes and intubation of victims perhaps?)

Dominic English
Dominic English
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Yes Tom. But by then the voters, egged on by a shrill, hysterical media were already whipped into a sort of panic. No UK government could have abandoned the lockdown policy at that point. They would have been hounded out of office. Absolutely tragic. And the hangover is voters seem desperate for ever more government intervention in their lives. https://open.substack.com/pub/lowstatus/p/the-government-is-rubbish-more-please?r=evzeq&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Heidi Mahon
Heidi Mahon
1 year ago
Reply to  Lindsay S

Tell me about it and don’t even get me started on the “my elderly parents brigade “a very distinct ,now very vocal and odd section of society ,many themselves ageing who cannot comprehend losing their beloved parents whatever the cost to anyone else

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi Mahon

I’m always surprised at how Remainers wanted lockdown to keep us old Gammon alive, having earlier wanted us all dead so they can reverse Brexit.
There’s a Covid was leaked conspiracy theory that hasn’t yet surfaced 🙂

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi Mahon

I’m always surprised at how Remainers wanted lockdown to keep us old Gammon alive, having earlier wanted us all dead so they can reverse Brexit.
There’s a Covid was leaked conspiracy theory that hasn’t yet surfaced 🙂

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Lindsay S

But given the opportunity would you have hung out in crowded, enclosed spaces not wearing a mask?

John Thorogood
John Thorogood
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Yes!

Mary Malde
Mary Malde
1 year ago
Reply to  John Thorogood

Yes. I had been frequenting the supposedly most infected areas of London, namely Kensington & Chelsea and Barnet (the hotspots) for months. Going on packed trains and into packed rooms. We now know a virus was present from September 2019 at least. Still to this day I’ve not had covid and not been ill and am not vaccinated and am supposedly in the “at risk’ category by age. Wore a mask only twice to avoid a violent attack on my person even though I would have floored them easily had they proceeded. I wore it for my son and husband’s sake as they are less able to handle confrontation than myself. Couldn’t handle being called a granny killer.
If the lockdown luvvies knew the truth behind the development of the pharmaceuticals and the reaction to the “pandemic” their worlds would be shattered. Many just can’t handle that truth. My hope is that over time they will learn to deal with the truth as it fully emerges (it is emerging, but very slowly) and finally accept it. I certainly know they will not like it and their inner peace will be taken from them.
They ought to start by asking themselves some very simply, basic questions like, why were known to be safe and effective respiratory therapeutics withdrawn from everyone? Why did one have to be close to death before one could get any medicine/treatment and then not an evidence based treatment but an experimental treatment?
N.B. I had proper flu in my twenties. I have had pneumonia once in my forties. I caught a very nasty respiratory infection whilst in Nepal on my way to Bhutan recently. I didn’t take any meds for any of those episodes. Just lemon, ginger and lots of fluids and lem sips and rest which my body demanded ( I couldn’t move if I wanted to).
I never knew the name of the virus and didn’t care to know.
One day I’ll have another infection, but I will not care to know the name of the virus then either. I’ll just get on with getting better. If I ever need meds or treatment and it is denied to me and I’m told not to bother anyone until my face goes blue because I can’t breath, as happened in the “pandemic”, I will be very suspicious of the authorities ethics and motives. Maybe I’ll be in my eighties when the next virus attacks me, but at least I know all about Midazolam now and will be alert to the euthanasia enthusiasts amongst lurking amongst us. In the meantime I’ll take my vit C, D and zinc and live a healthy life even if it is a shattered one.

Mary Malde
Mary Malde
1 year ago
Reply to  John Thorogood

Yes. I had been frequenting the supposedly most infected areas of London, namely Kensington & Chelsea and Barnet (the hotspots) for months. Going on packed trains and into packed rooms. We now know a virus was present from September 2019 at least. Still to this day I’ve not had covid and not been ill and am not vaccinated and am supposedly in the “at risk’ category by age. Wore a mask only twice to avoid a violent attack on my person even though I would have floored them easily had they proceeded. I wore it for my son and husband’s sake as they are less able to handle confrontation than myself. Couldn’t handle being called a granny killer.
If the lockdown luvvies knew the truth behind the development of the pharmaceuticals and the reaction to the “pandemic” their worlds would be shattered. Many just can’t handle that truth. My hope is that over time they will learn to deal with the truth as it fully emerges (it is emerging, but very slowly) and finally accept it. I certainly know they will not like it and their inner peace will be taken from them.
They ought to start by asking themselves some very simply, basic questions like, why were known to be safe and effective respiratory therapeutics withdrawn from everyone? Why did one have to be close to death before one could get any medicine/treatment and then not an evidence based treatment but an experimental treatment?
N.B. I had proper flu in my twenties. I have had pneumonia once in my forties. I caught a very nasty respiratory infection whilst in Nepal on my way to Bhutan recently. I didn’t take any meds for any of those episodes. Just lemon, ginger and lots of fluids and lem sips and rest which my body demanded ( I couldn’t move if I wanted to).
I never knew the name of the virus and didn’t care to know.
One day I’ll have another infection, but I will not care to know the name of the virus then either. I’ll just get on with getting better. If I ever need meds or treatment and it is denied to me and I’m told not to bother anyone until my face goes blue because I can’t breath, as happened in the “pandemic”, I will be very suspicious of the authorities ethics and motives. Maybe I’ll be in my eighties when the next virus attacks me, but at least I know all about Midazolam now and will be alert to the euthanasia enthusiasts amongst lurking amongst us. In the meantime I’ll take my vit C, D and zinc and live a healthy life even if it is a shattered one.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I did, but then I was immune having had it in Nov 2019, in fact having it seems to have done wonders for my immune system

Lindsay S
Lindsay S
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Yes

Dominic English
Dominic English
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Of course. What were masks doing? Nothing. They clearly did not work. If there was the slightest evidence they did, it would have been shoved down our throat at every opportunity. Not a single scary poster, nothing. Pure theatre.

Lindsay S
Lindsay S
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I would go as far to add that many are more fearful of losing their home and livelihood to an economic crash caused by lockdown than a form of flu with a 98% survival rate

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I never do that anyway so I wouldn’t .

John Thorogood
John Thorogood
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Yes!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I did, but then I was immune having had it in Nov 2019, in fact having it seems to have done wonders for my immune system

Lindsay S
Lindsay S
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Yes

Dominic English
Dominic English
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Of course. What were masks doing? Nothing. They clearly did not work. If there was the slightest evidence they did, it would have been shoved down our throat at every opportunity. Not a single scary poster, nothing. Pure theatre.

Lindsay S
Lindsay S
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I would go as far to add that many are more fearful of losing their home and livelihood to an economic crash caused by lockdown than a form of flu with a 98% survival rate

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I never do that anyway so I wouldn’t .

tom j
tom j
1 year ago
Reply to  Lindsay S

Lindsay you are right, though I’d say those first few weeks we didn’t know what we were dealing with – in fact in the UK people ‘locked down’ before the government asked them to. But by summer 2020 we knew enough, people were not scared of the disease but we ceded control to the most anxious and bureaucratic forces in the country.

Heidi Mahon
Heidi Mahon
1 year ago
Reply to  Lindsay S

Tell me about it and don’t even get me started on the “my elderly parents brigade “a very distinct ,now very vocal and odd section of society ,many themselves ageing who cannot comprehend losing their beloved parents whatever the cost to anyone else

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Lindsay S

But given the opportunity would you have hung out in crowded, enclosed spaces not wearing a mask?

R Ec
R Ec
1 year ago

…but they are paying for it now: the Cost of Lockdown Crisis (MSM call it the C of Living C) but inflation is because of the cost of lockdown. As you say “a lot of Brits did not experience the financial impact of lockdowns during the lockdown” but now they are; it’s the Cost of Lockdown Crisis (I correct everyone I hear say the mainstream label ‘cost of living crisis’; do the same!

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

Had this discussion with a friend in the UK in about April 2020. I said lockdowns would ruin economies… she said you will just build it again! Build away.

Adam Bacon
Adam Bacon
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

Absolutely! I do the same. It seems to be an integral part of the wilful blindness/denial process for those who followed The Narrative, to completely blank the obvious consequences, of deciding to take the ‘nuclear’ option and shut our economies and societies down.

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

Intend ‘borrowing’ that and speaking with a loud voice on the bus into town tomorrow and any other morning. Hope you don’t mind.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

I won’t totally disagree, BUT a crisis was coming anyway and ironically it wasn’t the lockdown inflation that kick-started it, it was Net Zero gas inflation – partly due to lockdown consequences I admit, BUT the main factor was that renewables failed to deliver. Hydro and Wind power in 2021 was so reduced (hydro not only in Portugal but Brazil) that a massive ‘dash for gas’ LNG occurred. Net Zero’s hammering of gas production meant not enough, prices rocketed hence all the UK companies going bust pre-Xmas 2021. It is also my contention that the Ukraine war started because of that. Putin seeing the gas prices & knowing he supplied Germany and the EU persuaded him the time was ripe to take Ukraine. Possibly why the initial push was disjointed and failed, it was rushed without sufficient planning. IF I’m right about that, then writing off Russia in that conflict is a big mistake.
https://www.rigzone.com/news/wire/brazil_needs_more_lng_amid_worst_drought_in_decades-03-jun-2021-165594-article/
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Europes-Energy-Crisis-Worsens-As-Wind-Stops-Blowing.html

Alan Bright
Alan Bright
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

In fairness, another big cause of the CLC is Putin

Rob Mcneill-wilson
Rob Mcneill-wilson
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

The Cost of Lockdown is compounded by the Cost of Futile Net Zero.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

Had this discussion with a friend in the UK in about April 2020. I said lockdowns would ruin economies… she said you will just build it again! Build away.

Adam Bacon
Adam Bacon
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

Absolutely! I do the same. It seems to be an integral part of the wilful blindness/denial process for those who followed The Narrative, to completely blank the obvious consequences, of deciding to take the ‘nuclear’ option and shut our economies and societies down.

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

Intend ‘borrowing’ that and speaking with a loud voice on the bus into town tomorrow and any other morning. Hope you don’t mind.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

I won’t totally disagree, BUT a crisis was coming anyway and ironically it wasn’t the lockdown inflation that kick-started it, it was Net Zero gas inflation – partly due to lockdown consequences I admit, BUT the main factor was that renewables failed to deliver. Hydro and Wind power in 2021 was so reduced (hydro not only in Portugal but Brazil) that a massive ‘dash for gas’ LNG occurred. Net Zero’s hammering of gas production meant not enough, prices rocketed hence all the UK companies going bust pre-Xmas 2021. It is also my contention that the Ukraine war started because of that. Putin seeing the gas prices & knowing he supplied Germany and the EU persuaded him the time was ripe to take Ukraine. Possibly why the initial push was disjointed and failed, it was rushed without sufficient planning. IF I’m right about that, then writing off Russia in that conflict is a big mistake.
https://www.rigzone.com/news/wire/brazil_needs_more_lng_amid_worst_drought_in_decades-03-jun-2021-165594-article/
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Europes-Energy-Crisis-Worsens-As-Wind-Stops-Blowing.html

Alan Bright
Alan Bright
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

In fairness, another big cause of the CLC is Putin

Rob Mcneill-wilson
Rob Mcneill-wilson
1 year ago
Reply to  R Ec

The Cost of Lockdown is compounded by the Cost of Futile Net Zero.

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago

YES, YES, YES! Too many people were paid not to work. Some (mainly unCivil Servants) are still working from home.) I am retired but for most of my working life I was a Seafarer and latterly a self-employed Trucker. There would have been no governent money for me and I know a lot of people still in those trades (if they were self-employed) were stuck between a rock and a hard place. Maybe many of those who vote for more lockdowns are those who woud benefit financially. Next pandemic we might see a tremendous fall in UNemployment as dolies game the system to get more money.

Alan Bright
Alan Bright
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Pingel

The self-employed (and I was one) did get government money.

Alan Bright
Alan Bright
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Pingel

The self-employed (and I was one) did get government money.

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago

In my perception,just me maybe,there was a lot of identifying as “respectable” by confirming to lockdown,wearing a mask,and that queuing at the supermarket,keeping studiously to the taped distance. I just got the vibe off nice couples in my age group (boomers) that conforming willingly and eagerly identified you as an innie,but not agreeing in fact even voicing dissent while queing and wearing a mask made you an outlaw. Not clapping and agreeing you believe in Fairies meant Tinkerbelle would die.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago
Reply to  jane baker

I noticed that juvenile cliquish behavior, too. Very sad. Where absolutely required, I did wear a (totally useless, I’m sure) mask, but not without first writing on them, in bold print: PLACEBO.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago
Reply to  jane baker

I noticed that juvenile cliquish behavior, too. Very sad. Where absolutely required, I did wear a (totally useless, I’m sure) mask, but not without first writing on them, in bold print: PLACEBO.

Lindsay S
Lindsay S
1 year ago

There was also a lot of mocking of people who were against lockdowns, those who have since been vindicated. Many people do not like to admit they were so wrong when they were so vocal about being right.
Everything that we have known for centuries about building resistance and immunity was said to be wrong and those who wanted to cling to those practises were mocked as tin foil hat wearing. Everything about lockdown and and the excessive use of sanitiser undermined resistance and immunity and yet it was lorded as the most honourable of practises!
If you were opposed to lockdowns and masks then you were a granny killer! If you pointed out the negative impact on the economy then you were a sociopath putting wealth before health. Some people were under the hysterical delusion that lockdowns, masks and social distancing could stop people from dying altogether!
It was utter nonsense from day one.

R Ec
R Ec
1 year ago

…but they are paying for it now: the Cost of Lockdown Crisis (MSM call it the C of Living C) but inflation is because of the cost of lockdown. As you say “a lot of Brits did not experience the financial impact of lockdowns during the lockdown” but now they are; it’s the Cost of Lockdown Crisis (I correct everyone I hear say the mainstream label ‘cost of living crisis’; do the same!

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago

YES, YES, YES! Too many people were paid not to work. Some (mainly unCivil Servants) are still working from home.) I am retired but for most of my working life I was a Seafarer and latterly a self-employed Trucker. There would have been no governent money for me and I know a lot of people still in those trades (if they were self-employed) were stuck between a rock and a hard place. Maybe many of those who vote for more lockdowns are those who woud benefit financially. Next pandemic we might see a tremendous fall in UNemployment as dolies game the system to get more money.

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago

In my perception,just me maybe,there was a lot of identifying as “respectable” by confirming to lockdown,wearing a mask,and that queuing at the supermarket,keeping studiously to the taped distance. I just got the vibe off nice couples in my age group (boomers) that conforming willingly and eagerly identified you as an innie,but not agreeing in fact even voicing dissent while queing and wearing a mask made you an outlaw. Not clapping and agreeing you believe in Fairies meant Tinkerbelle would die.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

The media landscape in Canada is one of the worst in the world. We have one somewhat centrist national newspaper. Everything else is pretty well left wing.

Barry Wilson
Barry Wilson
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

and yet did I read somewhere that Canada has gained another million people, mostly immigrants, in the last year?One can only hope they believe in a democracy, civil rights, freedom of speech and a free press.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Barry Wilson

Has Rupert Murdoch left Canada untouched? Lucky you.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

He doesn’t own anything in Canada. I can’t think of one truly right-wing corporate media outlet in Canada. The National newspaper is right centre I would think. Everything else is left wing. There’s some small, independent right-wing outfits like Rebel News.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

He doesn’t own anything in Canada. I can’t think of one truly right-wing corporate media outlet in Canada. The National newspaper is right centre I would think. Everything else is left wing. There’s some small, independent right-wing outfits like Rebel News.

Colin Goodfellow
Colin Goodfellow
1 year ago
Reply to  Barry Wilson

Its not the immigrants one worries about in Canada, is the reactionaries and rent a brown shirt mob. One neo facist primier already

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Barry Wilson

Has Rupert Murdoch left Canada untouched? Lucky you.

Colin Goodfellow
Colin Goodfellow
1 year ago
Reply to  Barry Wilson

Its not the immigrants one worries about in Canada, is the reactionaries and rent a brown shirt mob. One neo facist primier already

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Heavily state sponsored too. Pravda!

Barry Wilson
Barry Wilson
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

and yet did I read somewhere that Canada has gained another million people, mostly immigrants, in the last year?One can only hope they believe in a democracy, civil rights, freedom of speech and a free press.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Heavily state sponsored too. Pravda!

Derek Bryce
Derek Bryce
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

I agree Kevin. Canada was a particularly egregious, though far from unique, case. My mother lives in British Columbia and her partner’s brain cancer was left undiagnosed then misdiagnosed for months during late winter and Spring 2020 because his GP wouldn’t see him in person ‘cos Covid’. After these months of my mother struggling alone to care for him, he was finally taken into hospital for a cat scan and given a few weeks. He ended his life using MAID around a fortnight later. All the while BC’s public health panjandrum, Dr. Bonnie Henry, was beatified by the lemming-like population. I was unable, because of the thicket of rules, regulations and hotel quarantine requirements on both sides of the Atlantic, to travel from the U.K. to support her. Even my brother in neighbouring Alberta was unable to travel across the provincial border at the height of it. Thankfully I have another brother who lives elsewhere in BC and he was able to come and take her back at least be with him, his wife and her grandchildren. I remember despairing conversations over WhatsApp video chat where mum was convinced she’d never see me in person again. I was finally able to travel to Canada to see her in August 2021 when Trudeau’s government grudgingly did away with hotel quarantine for Canadian citizens only. These f*****s in the U.K., Canadian and so many other governments have a lot to answer for. I’ll never forgive them.

Last edited 1 year ago by Derek Bryce
Peadar Laighléis
Peadar Laighléis
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

I am very sorry to hear about the circumstances in which your mother’s partner died, but it reinforces my suspicion that MAID, or its equivalent in other jurisdictions, can be convenient in covering up other people’s/institutions’ failures.

Last edited 1 year ago by Peadar Laighléis
Derek Bryce
Derek Bryce
1 year ago

He had already made his wishes clear that he wanted to use MAID if he found himself with a terminal illness before covid. I agree there has been overreach since.

Derek Bryce
Derek Bryce
1 year ago

He had already made his wishes clear that he wanted to use MAID if he found himself with a terminal illness before covid. I agree there has been overreach since.

Kevan Hudson
Kevan Hudson
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

As a resident of British Columbia I am truly sorry for what happened to your family.
Being Covid unvaccinated in BC was a small group (including me) that was largely unorganized. I only told family and a few close friends I was unvaccinated lest I be the center of attack.
I love my country but as the nanny state grows, both provincial and federal governments have increased in the number of bureaucrats by over 20% since 2015-2017, and the state continues to reduce so called harm and misinformation (Bill C-11) I might not be long in my beautiful province.
My stance during the pandemic had many labeling right wing or even a Nazi yet I have long been a radical leftist.
In summary one must remember the immortal words of American investigative journalist I.F. Stone, “All governments lie!”

Kasandra Lighthouse
Kasandra Lighthouse
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevan Hudson

I am sorry. Take care. People have a faint memory of how we checked one another which was truly nazi-like. You don’t have to tell anyone anything that might put you at discrimination. ~ X

Derek Bryce
Derek Bryce
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevan Hudson

Did you see the nativity scene somewhere on Vancouver Island where some crazed Branch-Covidians had replaced one of the three wise men with an effigy of Bonnie Henry? That gave me the dry heaves.

Kasandra Lighthouse
Kasandra Lighthouse
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevan Hudson

I am sorry. Take care. People have a faint memory of how we checked one another which was truly nazi-like. You don’t have to tell anyone anything that might put you at discrimination. ~ X

Derek Bryce
Derek Bryce
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevan Hudson

Did you see the nativity scene somewhere on Vancouver Island where some crazed Branch-Covidians had replaced one of the three wise men with an effigy of Bonnie Henry? That gave me the dry heaves.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

My heart goes out to you Derek. Awful way to treat human beings.

My wife works for an agency that supports people with disabilities – a lot of clients with Down syndrome.

Lockdowns were horrible for some of them. Any client who was working lost their job, their outings ended abruptly, their social networks were destroyed.

Some of the clients have never recovered. A couple suffered severe mental health issues and have not recovered from those.

Derek Bryce
Derek Bryce
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Just awful what happened to those people you mention, Jim. Never let anyone forget. I never will and don’t care if that alienates some people. It was evil.

Last edited 1 year ago by Derek Bryce
Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

None of this gets a lick of attention from the regime media. Sad state of affairs.

Rocky Martiano
Rocky Martiano
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Perhaps the greatest travesty of this whole sorry episode, Jim. The Pravda-like government censorship of the media during the pandemic has morphed into self-censorship, which manifests itself in the refusal to take stock of what happened, recognise the mistakes and punish the guilty parties.
Despite Musk’s best efforts to de-censor Twitter, I fear the majority of MSM and social media are gone for good into the dark dungeon of groupthink.

Rocky Martiano
Rocky Martiano
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Perhaps the greatest travesty of this whole sorry episode, Jim. The Pravda-like government censorship of the media during the pandemic has morphed into self-censorship, which manifests itself in the refusal to take stock of what happened, recognise the mistakes and punish the guilty parties.
Despite Musk’s best efforts to de-censor Twitter, I fear the majority of MSM and social media are gone for good into the dark dungeon of groupthink.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

None of this gets a lick of attention from the regime media. Sad state of affairs.

Derek Bryce
Derek Bryce
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Just awful what happened to those people you mention, Jim. Never let anyone forget. I never will and don’t care if that alienates some people. It was evil.

Last edited 1 year ago by Derek Bryce
Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

I had to google MAID. It sounds like a reassuring choice to have available.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Yes, possibly the most attractive thing in Canada!

Betsy Arehart
Betsy Arehart
1 year ago

It may bring you lot of death tourism: beautiful resorts in glorious locations, no questions asked, where all death related services will be provided. Quite possibly at government expense, or one of those public-private partnerships.

Betsy Arehart
Betsy Arehart
1 year ago

It may bring you lot of death tourism: beautiful resorts in glorious locations, no questions asked, where all death related services will be provided. Quite possibly at government expense, or one of those public-private partnerships.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Yes, possibly the most attractive thing in Canada!

Peadar Laighléis
Peadar Laighléis
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

I am very sorry to hear about the circumstances in which your mother’s partner died, but it reinforces my suspicion that MAID, or its equivalent in other jurisdictions, can be convenient in covering up other people’s/institutions’ failures.

Last edited 1 year ago by Peadar Laighléis
Kevan Hudson
Kevan Hudson
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

As a resident of British Columbia I am truly sorry for what happened to your family.
Being Covid unvaccinated in BC was a small group (including me) that was largely unorganized. I only told family and a few close friends I was unvaccinated lest I be the center of attack.
I love my country but as the nanny state grows, both provincial and federal governments have increased in the number of bureaucrats by over 20% since 2015-2017, and the state continues to reduce so called harm and misinformation (Bill C-11) I might not be long in my beautiful province.
My stance during the pandemic had many labeling right wing or even a Nazi yet I have long been a radical leftist.
In summary one must remember the immortal words of American investigative journalist I.F. Stone, “All governments lie!”

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

My heart goes out to you Derek. Awful way to treat human beings.

My wife works for an agency that supports people with disabilities – a lot of clients with Down syndrome.

Lockdowns were horrible for some of them. Any client who was working lost their job, their outings ended abruptly, their social networks were destroyed.

Some of the clients have never recovered. A couple suffered severe mental health issues and have not recovered from those.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Bryce

I had to google MAID. It sounds like a reassuring choice to have available.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

I can just imagine the editor’s office when this poll result came in: “Well how inconvenient, these silly people with their clear thinking and unbiased opinions – quick Freddie, give us a nice cynical piece to keep the regulars onside.”

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

“Imagine” – sounds right. I bet you imagined all those billions dying from the new black death that didn’t even leave the Diamond Princess a floating morgue.
Still, at least you didn’t claim to ‘think’. 😉

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

“Imagine” – sounds right. I bet you imagined all those billions dying from the new black death that didn’t even leave the Diamond Princess a floating morgue.
Still, at least you didn’t claim to ‘think’. 😉

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

It was crystal clear from the beginning that (ala the Great Barrington Resolution) that the way to go was as outlined below. As a professional risk management consultant I wrote to Cummings (remember him?) and outlined a workable solution.
To put it simply, the only viable option was to isolate the vulnerable not try to isolate the virus which was obviously an impossibility, with the ludicrously expensive and utterly useless ‘test & trace’ scam.
The basic steps would involve:
1. Commandeer every holiday camp/village and isolated hotel etc in the country and cordon them off to prevent unauthorised access.. army patrolled to ensure same. No restriction on anyone voluntarily leaving but don’t come back!
1A. Build log cabins, mobile homes, nissan huts etc as fast as possible to enhance facilities.
2. Rigorous testing and quarantine prior to entry.
3. Residents inside to provide their own services afap (doctor, nurse, cook, laundry workers coming out of retirement). Any other service providers to be live-in and vetted prior to entry just like residents.
4. Totally VOLUNTARY participation.. any vulnerable person wishing to stay at home may do so but run a high risk, if course.
5. Life (work/school/leisure/play/socialise) to continue AS NORMAL both inside and outside the Refuge Villages, with sensible precautions only observed.
Piece of cake.. No need for useless PPE or grotestly expensive test n trace scams.
NB: Nursing Homes are a separate issue, but
Downing St parties can go right ahead!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

It was never as bad as they claim. Once it was clear (and note there wasn’t any great headlines in the papers when it became clear) that intubation/ventilators were a death sentence and so automatic use of them was halted, the mortality started to fall.
The facts remain that the numbers who actually died “OF Covid” were tiny, those who died ‘With it” made the numbers up, even so, the mortality figures were nowhere near the claims (are they ever?) the doomsday Prof gave, AND very quickly reverted to the norm once the Care Home m@ss@cres by emptying hospitals etc had played out.
There is a reason Pneumonia was called the old man’s friend, because it was like the bottom of the hill, the inevitable destination of a downward trend of a sick person’s health. It made for a quieter death, BUT it was the end of a journey, not the beginning. Covid was a little like peumonia in that it killed in > 90% of cases, elderly with at least one co-mordbidity and above the average life expectancy. ALL that was known from Italy and Diamond Princess early on. The rest was mythology and Hancock is exposing that. The fact that many don’t want to know won’t change things, one day historians will look back amazed. Though if we manage to make Ukraine into a nuclear war, it may be many centuries in the future.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

It was never as bad as they claim. Once it was clear (and note there wasn’t any great headlines in the papers when it became clear) that intubation/ventilators were a death sentence and so automatic use of them was halted, the mortality started to fall.
The facts remain that the numbers who actually died “OF Covid” were tiny, those who died ‘With it” made the numbers up, even so, the mortality figures were nowhere near the claims (are they ever?) the doomsday Prof gave, AND very quickly reverted to the norm once the Care Home m@ss@cres by emptying hospitals etc had played out.
There is a reason Pneumonia was called the old man’s friend, because it was like the bottom of the hill, the inevitable destination of a downward trend of a sick person’s health. It made for a quieter death, BUT it was the end of a journey, not the beginning. Covid was a little like peumonia in that it killed in > 90% of cases, elderly with at least one co-mordbidity and above the average life expectancy. ALL that was known from Italy and Diamond Princess early on. The rest was mythology and Hancock is exposing that. The fact that many don’t want to know won’t change things, one day historians will look back amazed. Though if we manage to make Ukraine into a nuclear war, it may be many centuries in the future.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

Excuse the fact I’ve not actually replied to your post , but I can’t seem to post without replying to someone!
The answers may be VERY simple for many people.
a) We were locked down during a very beautiful period of weather.
b) IF like my family your grown up children returned home to a semi-detached with a wonderful view, large rear garden, easy access to country walks AND the workers got to work from Home (so a brilliant ability to choose hours etc)
c) MAYBE you got Furlough payments
d) You didn’t have any need for the NHS
e) You had no elderly relatives at death’s door or in a care-home
f) or perhaps you had young children and could enjoy their company (I missed much of my children’s young life as I worked away from home for years only returning at weekends)
g) The Financial consequences haven’t yet totally hit home & the economic disaster coming is also down to Net Zero so can be used to excuse lockdown.
h) Your education (particularly Uni Post Grad science MScs) wasn’t destroyed or seriously damaged.
Why would you regret it?
Give us another year maybe AND assuming the economic catastrophe is NOT blamed on ‘The Tories’ or on the common policies all the GreenPlaidSNPLibLabCons follow, such as QE, low interest rates, and worst of all Net Zero – (lock-down should come in there with Net Zero)
BUT all the pleasant/absence of toxic ones of it listed above mean it may be worth taking the ‘results’ of that survey with a giant sack of salt. As psychologists often tell you, ‘lived experiences’ are some of the most potent memories – possibly why many used to look back on the war years as a peculiarly good time.
Maybe the survey needs to ask about any of the circumstances mentioned in a-g above and break out the results that way too?

Jim R
Jim R
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

Same here – the only good thing to come out of this madness for me was discovering unherd and lockdown sceptics (and Brett Weinstein etc). Canada is a hopeless wasteland of timid conformity and i might have lost my mind without access to other viewpoints. Soon Trudeau will fully implement his censorship regime and when I type “unherd” into my browser i will get redirected to the CBC. I will miss you all.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

It is very simple…. a lot of Brits did not experience the financial impact of lockdowns during the lockdown and don’t seem to have the wherewithal to link things up now. Maybe also didn’t have the imagination and curiosity and thirst for knowledge to see the societal impacts and other harms? Also imo the population is too invested in the nanny state. Show me the people who lost their livelihoods who supported this travesty.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lesley van Reenen
Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

The media landscape in Canada is one of the worst in the world. We have one somewhat centrist national newspaper. Everything else is pretty well left wing.

Derek Bryce
Derek Bryce
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

I agree Kevin. Canada was a particularly egregious, though far from unique, case. My mother lives in British Columbia and her partner’s brain cancer was left undiagnosed then misdiagnosed for months during late winter and Spring 2020 because his GP wouldn’t see him in person ‘cos Covid’. After these months of my mother struggling alone to care for him, he was finally taken into hospital for a cat scan and given a few weeks. He ended his life using MAID around a fortnight later. All the while BC’s public health panjandrum, Dr. Bonnie Henry, was beatified by the lemming-like population. I was unable, because of the thicket of rules, regulations and hotel quarantine requirements on both sides of the Atlantic, to travel from the U.K. to support her. Even my brother in neighbouring Alberta was unable to travel across the provincial border at the height of it. Thankfully I have another brother who lives elsewhere in BC and he was able to come and take her back at least be with him, his wife and her grandchildren. I remember despairing conversations over WhatsApp video chat where mum was convinced she’d never see me in person again. I was finally able to travel to Canada to see her in August 2021 when Trudeau’s government grudgingly did away with hotel quarantine for Canadian citizens only. These f*****s in the U.K., Canadian and so many other governments have a lot to answer for. I’ll never forgive them.

Last edited 1 year ago by Derek Bryce
Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

I can just imagine the editor’s office when this poll result came in: “Well how inconvenient, these silly people with their clear thinking and unbiased opinions – quick Freddie, give us a nice cynical piece to keep the regulars onside.”

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

It was crystal clear from the beginning that (ala the Great Barrington Resolution) that the way to go was as outlined below. As a professional risk management consultant I wrote to Cummings (remember him?) and outlined a workable solution.
To put it simply, the only viable option was to isolate the vulnerable not try to isolate the virus which was obviously an impossibility, with the ludicrously expensive and utterly useless ‘test & trace’ scam.
The basic steps would involve:
1. Commandeer every holiday camp/village and isolated hotel etc in the country and cordon them off to prevent unauthorised access.. army patrolled to ensure same. No restriction on anyone voluntarily leaving but don’t come back!
1A. Build log cabins, mobile homes, nissan huts etc as fast as possible to enhance facilities.
2. Rigorous testing and quarantine prior to entry.
3. Residents inside to provide their own services afap (doctor, nurse, cook, laundry workers coming out of retirement). Any other service providers to be live-in and vetted prior to entry just like residents.
4. Totally VOLUNTARY participation.. any vulnerable person wishing to stay at home may do so but run a high risk, if course.
5. Life (work/school/leisure/play/socialise) to continue AS NORMAL both inside and outside the Refuge Villages, with sensible precautions only observed.
Piece of cake.. No need for useless PPE or grotestly expensive test n trace scams.
NB: Nursing Homes are a separate issue, but
Downing St parties can go right ahead!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Kevin Hamann

Excuse the fact I’ve not actually replied to your post , but I can’t seem to post without replying to someone!
The answers may be VERY simple for many people.
a) We were locked down during a very beautiful period of weather.
b) IF like my family your grown up children returned home to a semi-detached with a wonderful view, large rear garden, easy access to country walks AND the workers got to work from Home (so a brilliant ability to choose hours etc)
c) MAYBE you got Furlough payments
d) You didn’t have any need for the NHS
e) You had no elderly relatives at death’s door or in a care-home
f) or perhaps you had young children and could enjoy their company (I missed much of my children’s young life as I worked away from home for years only returning at weekends)
g) The Financial consequences haven’t yet totally hit home & the economic disaster coming is also down to Net Zero so can be used to excuse lockdown.
h) Your education (particularly Uni Post Grad science MScs) wasn’t destroyed or seriously damaged.
Why would you regret it?
Give us another year maybe AND assuming the economic catastrophe is NOT blamed on ‘The Tories’ or on the common policies all the GreenPlaidSNPLibLabCons follow, such as QE, low interest rates, and worst of all Net Zero – (lock-down should come in there with Net Zero)
BUT all the pleasant/absence of toxic ones of it listed above mean it may be worth taking the ‘results’ of that survey with a giant sack of salt. As psychologists often tell you, ‘lived experiences’ are some of the most potent memories – possibly why many used to look back on the war years as a peculiarly good time.
Maybe the survey needs to ask about any of the circumstances mentioned in a-g above and break out the results that way too?

Kevin Hamann
Kevin Hamann
1 year ago

Sadly it is the same in Canada. Unherd is the only online platform i pay for. Keep fighting the good fight Freddie.

Andrew Horsman
Andrew Horsman
1 year ago

I won’t ever be able to look at the people in the same way after what we collectively allowed to happen in 2020. Freddie is spot on that fear and moral panic led to appallingly bad misjudgments and still – after all of the harms, the pain, the suffering the “lockdowns” caused – so many people cannot seem to see past the narrative with which they were firebombed. It wasn’t the Black Death. It was dropped from PHE’s list of highly infectious diseases of high consequence BEFORE the lockdowns started. The Diamond Princess demonstrated that it wouldn’t wipe out “the vulnerable” en masse. No, this was an exercise in power, coercion, a cynical manipulation of good people’s compassion, guilt, pride, shame, and fear. They were tricked – by greedy, cowardly, messed up, powerful people – into harming themselves, their children, their families, and their communities: all for naught. It’s time folk in all walks of life found the humility and courage that lies deep within each of us to admit they got it wrong, and to look at evil directly in its eyes.

Unlike Freddie, I remain angry with the people who perpetrated this calamity, but I also think anger can be power, if you know how to use it – and I genuinely think the people who did this, whomsoever they may be, are now more afraid of us than we are of them (in fact they probably always were).

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Well said.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Well said!
However it is all too easy to blame everything on the wretched Government, however culpable they maybe.

This island is supposed to be one of the most sophisticated spots on the planet, yet our ‘demos’ proved to be nothing more than vacuous cretins! How could this have happened? And worse still, will it happen again?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

The ” pipl” are vacuous, ignorant ill educated lemmings, who will do what they are told meekly, especially if by a gnome in a high viz vest, or ” on line”…. one only had to look at the queues of the ” Toylitte Stationary” automatons: these people elect our politicians, and even more frighteningly, ” serve” on our juries, and nowadays are our Magistrates.

Philip Burrell
Philip Burrell
1 year ago

Ah. The wonders of an education at a minor Catholic public school followed by stints in the Army and the City do bring out the best in people. It must be so enjoyable to look down with contempt on the hoi polloi. Such a shame that so many of those ignorant “pipl” committed economic suicide by siding with the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and co and voted for Brexit. But then again what else would you expect from them.

Last edited 1 year ago by Philip Burrell
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Philip Burrell

Hoi polloi!

No need for THE as hoi is the definite article.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Philip Burrell

” does” not ” do” even my edukayshun tort mi heow te rite….

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Philip Burrell

Hoi polloi!

No need for THE as hoi is the definite article.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Philip Burrell

” does” not ” do” even my edukayshun tort mi heow te rite….

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

Actually a lot of the ‘ppl’ live in their own alternative world where they take no notice of the chattering classes and those who try and lord it over us. They have learnt that drawing attention to oneself simply brings down opprobrium and potentially negative sanctions. Hence they simply don’t obey the laws they don’t like and carry on until they are caught, BUT with our current police farce, they aren’t often caught.
It was easy enough to not wear a mask, curiously the only place I couldn’t get away with it was in NHS run places, still can’t because telling them you are exempt if challenged means they want to know how & why. No one else did, in fact no one even bothered to ask.

Last edited 1 year ago by Simon Simple
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

I wore a full face metal welders mask… it didn’t half rev up the coronaphobes at Tesco…

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

I wore a full face metal welders mask… it didn’t half rev up the coronaphobes at Tesco…

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

And Judges!

Philip Burrell
Philip Burrell
1 year ago

Ah. The wonders of an education at a minor Catholic public school followed by stints in the Army and the City do bring out the best in people. It must be so enjoyable to look down with contempt on the hoi polloi. Such a shame that so many of those ignorant “pipl” committed economic suicide by siding with the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and co and voted for Brexit. But then again what else would you expect from them.

Last edited 1 year ago by Philip Burrell
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

Actually a lot of the ‘ppl’ live in their own alternative world where they take no notice of the chattering classes and those who try and lord it over us. They have learnt that drawing attention to oneself simply brings down opprobrium and potentially negative sanctions. Hence they simply don’t obey the laws they don’t like and carry on until they are caught, BUT with our current police farce, they aren’t often caught.
It was easy enough to not wear a mask, curiously the only place I couldn’t get away with it was in NHS run places, still can’t because telling them you are exempt if challenged means they want to know how & why. No one else did, in fact no one even bothered to ask.

Last edited 1 year ago by Simon Simple
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

And Judges!

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago

Once the Global Pandemic Treaty is signed next year allowing the WHO to decide what constitutes a pandemic, the overriding power of the Treaty is bound to lock us all down again. Sovereign states will be allowed to decide their own responses allegedly, providing, and here’s the crunch, they do not put the health of their population at risk and of course you can guess who gets to decide on that one…… the World Health Organisation’s legally binding Treaty!

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Jane H

The WHO will soon prove to be a greater danger than Adolph & Co ever were!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

The WHO should be renamed the Wuhan Health Organisation, they should have no credibility whatsoever with the Chinese connections they have. Come to think of it, they don’t have any credibility in my eyes, and the UN is going the same way with their IPCC garbage. We should stop funding both organisations.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Precisely, well said.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Precisely, well said.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

The WHO should be renamed the Wuhan Health Organisation, they should have no credibility whatsoever with the Chinese connections they have. Come to think of it, they don’t have any credibility in my eyes, and the UN is going the same way with their IPCC garbage. We should stop funding both organisations.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Jane H

The WHO will soon prove to be a greater danger than Adolph & Co ever were!

Alex Stonor
Alex Stonor
1 year ago

I do think that there was another actor at play: most people work hard for mediocre salaries or less. They have little time to spend on either leisure, family or household chores. Lockdown was the first time that we were given that time and I noticed how exhausted people were. Professions where burnout is especially severe, were the most supportive of lockdowns: education & social services. These people could, to some extent, take to the sofa, breathe, bake. Interestingly, the culture of presentiism is as entrenched as it was before covid: colleagues coughing & spluttering over keyboards; testing negative for covid. So the fear & moral panic hasn’t changed us or our working practices and so we will exhaust ourselves again and probably thrill to the prospect of another deadly round of lockdowns .

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Stonor

That is an interesting take, the sudden ‘lack of staff’ post lockdowns across the globes (I know it was due to Brexit) but perhaps it might have been due to the enjoyment of NOT working. The fact that there appears to be a slow return to working may be due to the money running out and so the enjoyment of not working is reduced.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Stonor

A very interesting observation indeed, thank you.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Stonor

That is an interesting take, the sudden ‘lack of staff’ post lockdowns across the globes (I know it was due to Brexit) but perhaps it might have been due to the enjoyment of NOT working. The fact that there appears to be a slow return to working may be due to the money running out and so the enjoyment of not working is reduced.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Stonor

A very interesting observation indeed, thank you.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

I’m not so sure of that. The Demos (plebians) turned up at beach parties in large numbers – it was our ‘sophisticated’ Patrician Demos who claimed they’d all die, though curiously being a member of the BLM appeared to provide immunity. sigh Just think, we could have saved a fortune on vaccines and all the subsequent harms that are coming to light simply by mandating membership of the BLM. I fear Starmer missed a trick there.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

An odd mix of Ancient Greek and Latin, but otherwise you are spot on.

As for BLM, what ridiculous nonsense.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

An odd mix of Ancient Greek and Latin, but otherwise you are spot on.

As for BLM, what ridiculous nonsense.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

The ” pipl” are vacuous, ignorant ill educated lemmings, who will do what they are told meekly, especially if by a gnome in a high viz vest, or ” on line”…. one only had to look at the queues of the ” Toylitte Stationary” automatons: these people elect our politicians, and even more frighteningly, ” serve” on our juries, and nowadays are our Magistrates.

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago

Once the Global Pandemic Treaty is signed next year allowing the WHO to decide what constitutes a pandemic, the overriding power of the Treaty is bound to lock us all down again. Sovereign states will be allowed to decide their own responses allegedly, providing, and here’s the crunch, they do not put the health of their population at risk and of course you can guess who gets to decide on that one…… the World Health Organisation’s legally binding Treaty!

Alex Stonor
Alex Stonor
1 year ago

I do think that there was another actor at play: most people work hard for mediocre salaries or less. They have little time to spend on either leisure, family or household chores. Lockdown was the first time that we were given that time and I noticed how exhausted people were. Professions where burnout is especially severe, were the most supportive of lockdowns: education & social services. These people could, to some extent, take to the sofa, breathe, bake. Interestingly, the culture of presentiism is as entrenched as it was before covid: colleagues coughing & spluttering over keyboards; testing negative for covid. So the fear & moral panic hasn’t changed us or our working practices and so we will exhaust ourselves again and probably thrill to the prospect of another deadly round of lockdowns .

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

I’m not so sure of that. The Demos (plebians) turned up at beach parties in large numbers – it was our ‘sophisticated’ Patrician Demos who claimed they’d all die, though curiously being a member of the BLM appeared to provide immunity. sigh Just think, we could have saved a fortune on vaccines and all the subsequent harms that are coming to light simply by mandating membership of the BLM. I fear Starmer missed a trick there.

Greg Moreison
Greg Moreison
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Great comment. With one tiny amendment: for us, it was indeed ‘all for naught’.
For ‘them’, however, it enabled the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of the planet.

For individualists, materialists, atheists and nihilists in the latter class, it would appear to have been a jolly good move.
For the rest of us who still believe in some tangible form of ‘The Common Good’, it remains to find a way forward knowing we cannot rely upon these people or the systems they have created and depend upon.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Greg Moreison

With all due respect that does sound a tad superior.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

BUT does it sound true?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Yes!

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Yes!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

BUT does it sound true?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Greg Moreison

With all due respect that does sound a tad superior.

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

People used to ask how the German people were ‘so easily’ swept up in the actions of National Socialism. Now you know.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

but we now have National Socialism… via the MasturbaTory garden drinks Party?

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

IF that was irony a smiley would help. You realise of course that before Boris’ parties, (which he didn’t always attend) the Scots Health Minister had resigned over breaking rules, the Doomsday Prof, who claimed we’d “All die” if we went out did so. Though I believe it was because he had a married mistress to die for. (Never seen a photo so not sure if I’d agree with him, tho’ given I never thought I’d die perhaps even a pretty mistress would have sufficed for me)
I could provide an almost endless list of politicians of all colours and in many states who broke the rules. So far only Boris has been arraigned. Mind you, given he was the man in charge, I’m not whinging ‘injustice’ too loudly, the buck stopped with him. I wait for the day Starmer is arraigned over something or other – maybe a close look at his lack of role in Child exploitation scandals, or his current support for Trans Child abuse?

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

IF that was irony a smiley would help. You realise of course that before Boris’ parties, (which he didn’t always attend) the Scots Health Minister had resigned over breaking rules, the Doomsday Prof, who claimed we’d “All die” if we went out did so. Though I believe it was because he had a married mistress to die for. (Never seen a photo so not sure if I’d agree with him, tho’ given I never thought I’d die perhaps even a pretty mistress would have sufficed for me)
I could provide an almost endless list of politicians of all colours and in many states who broke the rules. So far only Boris has been arraigned. Mind you, given he was the man in charge, I’m not whinging ‘injustice’ too loudly, the buck stopped with him. I wait for the day Starmer is arraigned over something or other – maybe a close look at his lack of role in Child exploitation scandals, or his current support for Trans Child abuse?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

but we now have National Socialism… via the MasturbaTory garden drinks Party?

Jim Stanton
Jim Stanton
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

This is an excellent post.

Peadar Laighléis
Peadar Laighléis
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Agree absolutely and I will take this one step farther (very germane to the reply below made by AC Harper about the German people being swept away be National Socialism in the 1930s – though I must emphasise this was a minority) in that many became the dupes of the system and informed on their neighbours in the misguided belief that they were acting in the common good. Yes, I am angry – angry at the effects of public policy as much how it was carried out. And I am writing from the Republic of Ireland where lockdown was more severe than in Britain, mainly because the bulk of Irish political parties are vying with each other to turn the RoI into a model Blue State.

Nanu Mitchell
Nanu Mitchell
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Agree wholeheartedly. These idiots have destroyed our civilisation, culture, faith, commerce, trust forever. Life will never be the same. Don’t believe anything they say or do.

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

The tools of 5th generation warfare unleashed on the public. And they worked! Those tools can be used to control and remove governments, beware.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Hardee Hodges

5th column?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Hardee Hodges

5th column?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

With all due respect you sound a little paranoid, particularly when you get into the “us versus them” mindset.

Iris Violet
Iris Violet
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

I share the anger but – sadly – do not feel that it empowers me in any way. Just left me unhappier having found truths I rather wouldn’t have.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Well said.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Well said!
However it is all too easy to blame everything on the wretched Government, however culpable they maybe.

This island is supposed to be one of the most sophisticated spots on the planet, yet our ‘demos’ proved to be nothing more than vacuous cretins! How could this have happened? And worse still, will it happen again?

Greg Moreison
Greg Moreison
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Great comment. With one tiny amendment: for us, it was indeed ‘all for naught’.
For ‘them’, however, it enabled the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of the planet.

For individualists, materialists, atheists and nihilists in the latter class, it would appear to have been a jolly good move.
For the rest of us who still believe in some tangible form of ‘The Common Good’, it remains to find a way forward knowing we cannot rely upon these people or the systems they have created and depend upon.

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

People used to ask how the German people were ‘so easily’ swept up in the actions of National Socialism. Now you know.

Jim Stanton
Jim Stanton
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

This is an excellent post.

Peadar Laighléis
Peadar Laighléis
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Agree absolutely and I will take this one step farther (very germane to the reply below made by AC Harper about the German people being swept away be National Socialism in the 1930s – though I must emphasise this was a minority) in that many became the dupes of the system and informed on their neighbours in the misguided belief that they were acting in the common good. Yes, I am angry – angry at the effects of public policy as much how it was carried out. And I am writing from the Republic of Ireland where lockdown was more severe than in Britain, mainly because the bulk of Irish political parties are vying with each other to turn the RoI into a model Blue State.

Nanu Mitchell
Nanu Mitchell
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

Agree wholeheartedly. These idiots have destroyed our civilisation, culture, faith, commerce, trust forever. Life will never be the same. Don’t believe anything they say or do.

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

The tools of 5th generation warfare unleashed on the public. And they worked! Those tools can be used to control and remove governments, beware.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

With all due respect you sound a little paranoid, particularly when you get into the “us versus them” mindset.

Iris Violet
Iris Violet
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Horsman

I share the anger but – sadly – do not feel that it empowers me in any way. Just left me unhappier having found truths I rather wouldn’t have.

Andrew Horsman
Andrew Horsman
1 year ago

I won’t ever be able to look at the people in the same way after what we collectively allowed to happen in 2020. Freddie is spot on that fear and moral panic led to appallingly bad misjudgments and still – after all of the harms, the pain, the suffering the “lockdowns” caused – so many people cannot seem to see past the narrative with which they were firebombed. It wasn’t the Black Death. It was dropped from PHE’s list of highly infectious diseases of high consequence BEFORE the lockdowns started. The Diamond Princess demonstrated that it wouldn’t wipe out “the vulnerable” en masse. No, this was an exercise in power, coercion, a cynical manipulation of good people’s compassion, guilt, pride, shame, and fear. They were tricked – by greedy, cowardly, messed up, powerful people – into harming themselves, their children, their families, and their communities: all for naught. It’s time folk in all walks of life found the humility and courage that lies deep within each of us to admit they got it wrong, and to look at evil directly in its eyes.

Unlike Freddie, I remain angry with the people who perpetrated this calamity, but I also think anger can be power, if you know how to use it – and I genuinely think the people who did this, whomsoever they may be, are now more afraid of us than we are of them (in fact they probably always were).

J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago

I believe many people in the West are tired of the struggle to live the lifestyle that is relentlessly sold to us, from our earliest years, by TV, the internet, movies, advertising in general. So many people simply can’t make a wage high enough to support a moderately affluent lifestyle. Our parents and, more likely, grandparents could afford “the great American dream” during the post-WWII boom, but no longer. The well-paid jobs are largely off-shored or consumed by technology.
Instinctively people sensed this change in economic reality, then along came covid, lockdowns, and extensive government financial support. For many people this represented the beginning of the future where most depend on government handouts while few of us do specialized, well compensated jobs to generate government tax revenue. For some people, lockdowns did not represent a great loss of freedoms because their poverty meant those freedoms were largely theoretical.
From my perspective, the greatest accomplishment of thirty years of globalism and neoliberal economics is to demoralize people to the point where all they want is some form of modest, guaranteed income and a reasonably stable life even if they must turn responsibility for much of their life over to the government. That’s not a desirable outcome but I suspect it’s where we are.

Russell Hamilton
Russell Hamilton
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

I guess we eased into it – compulsory seatbelt wearing in cars seemed a good idea, bicycle helmets (a little more controversial) similarly, but now, apparently, I need an Occupational Health & Safety person to come and check my office chair and tell me how to sit correctly on it.

Stu B
Stu B
1 year ago

Right at the start China report a fatality rate of less than 1%. That should have been enough information protect the elderly and let everyone else carry on. Blitz spirit, my a**e.

Bruce Edgar
Bruce Edgar
1 year ago
Reply to  Stu B

The Great Barrington Declaration, published and signed by important scientists from around the world, recommended just that: focus on the vulnerable (obese, fragile, immuno compromised) and let the rest go about their business. The great canard fueling the panic: “it’s a highly infectious disease). Laughter is highly contagious also, but it kills few. Over 90% of those who got Covid did not die, and most cases were flu-like. But the damage has already been done, and it is visible for us all now: the same group think, the same panic regarding Russia’s very much provoked invasion of Ukarine. We are soooo screwed, and we never learn–not even from the very immediate past.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruce Edgar

Russia’s “very much provoked” invasion of Ukraine. Really? you and I live in very different worlds.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

His informed, yours not it would appear.

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Im in that different world too. Russia is defiantly holding out against America’s intent to get control of all that eastern territory and thus free access to the fuel sources there. As the days of overt colonialism are over they are doing it is in a more covert way. I hate Ukrainians anyway so I don’t care if they lose. I want them to lose but so actually do the Yanks who are mercilessly using them.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

His informed, yours not it would appear.

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Im in that different world too. Russia is defiantly holding out against America’s intent to get control of all that eastern territory and thus free access to the fuel sources there. As the days of overt colonialism are over they are doing it is in a more covert way. I hate Ukrainians anyway so I don’t care if they lose. I want them to lose but so actually do the Yanks who are mercilessly using them.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruce Edgar

Surely, you mean that 99.99% of covid infections did not result in death?

Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew F
Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruce Edgar

Russia’s “very much provoked” invasion of Ukraine. Really? you and I live in very different worlds.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruce Edgar

Surely, you mean that 99.99% of covid infections did not result in death?

Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew F
Bruce Edgar
Bruce Edgar
1 year ago
Reply to  Stu B

The Great Barrington Declaration, published and signed by important scientists from around the world, recommended just that: focus on the vulnerable (obese, fragile, immuno compromised) and let the rest go about their business. The great canard fueling the panic: “it’s a highly infectious disease). Laughter is highly contagious also, but it kills few. Over 90% of those who got Covid did not die, and most cases were flu-like. But the damage has already been done, and it is visible for us all now: the same group think, the same panic regarding Russia’s very much provoked invasion of Ukarine. We are soooo screwed, and we never learn–not even from the very immediate past.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

LOL – my vehicle has an alarm that keeps telling me to put the seat belt on. I won’t bore you with what I do that means I’m happy with the risk of not wearing it, BUT if you are fed up, you need to join the ‘underground’. There are far more than you think. ie Those of us who ignore what we want because we can’t get those in authority to listen to us no matter what
I ignore the law on belts a lot of the time because it is contradicted by the demands made on me to reach targets. It is in more in my interests to reach my targets and to ensure I drive carefully enough to meet them than wear a seat belt. That also means I concentrate more on avoiding crashing & if someone did hit me, well, life is always full of risks. The biggest risk is avoiding being knocked down once I’m out the vehicle. But if they catch me, I’ll apologise and claim some excuse; may even self-identify as psychologically unable to wear a restraint or as some oppressed minority and claim ‘discrimination’ There must be some odd religion where a seat belt isn’t allowed. IF not I’ll start one.
As for the vehicle alarm, it is very bureaucratic, and it doesn’t know that the seat belt only fastens the seat. The Tacho is smarter mind, it shuts down the vehicle once the engine is off and handbrake applied if you go over hours. Which is fine by me, because I can’t then be attacked over missed targets – “It wuz the Tacho Guv!”

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

The more interesting argument is that ” speed kills” : it is a matter of empirical fact that collisions could not occur per se, if either of the colliding parties were travelling faster, or indeed slower.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

The more interesting argument is that ” speed kills” : it is a matter of empirical fact that collisions could not occur per se, if either of the colliding parties were travelling faster, or indeed slower.

Stu B
Stu B
1 year ago

Right at the start China report a fatality rate of less than 1%. That should have been enough information protect the elderly and let everyone else carry on. Blitz spirit, my a**e.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

LOL – my vehicle has an alarm that keeps telling me to put the seat belt on. I won’t bore you with what I do that means I’m happy with the risk of not wearing it, BUT if you are fed up, you need to join the ‘underground’. There are far more than you think. ie Those of us who ignore what we want because we can’t get those in authority to listen to us no matter what
I ignore the law on belts a lot of the time because it is contradicted by the demands made on me to reach targets. It is in more in my interests to reach my targets and to ensure I drive carefully enough to meet them than wear a seat belt. That also means I concentrate more on avoiding crashing & if someone did hit me, well, life is always full of risks. The biggest risk is avoiding being knocked down once I’m out the vehicle. But if they catch me, I’ll apologise and claim some excuse; may even self-identify as psychologically unable to wear a restraint or as some oppressed minority and claim ‘discrimination’ There must be some odd religion where a seat belt isn’t allowed. IF not I’ll start one.
As for the vehicle alarm, it is very bureaucratic, and it doesn’t know that the seat belt only fastens the seat. The Tacho is smarter mind, it shuts down the vehicle once the engine is off and handbrake applied if you go over hours. Which is fine by me, because I can’t then be attacked over missed targets – “It wuz the Tacho Guv!”

Andrew McDonald
Andrew McDonald
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

‘ For some people, lockdowns did not represent a great loss of freedoms because their poverty meant those freedoms were largely theoretical.’

You can’t say that often enough. The decline of the civil state and the degradation of our common cultural capital over the last 30 years has left a huge population in the UK which has nothing much in common with politicians and journalists, and doesn’t understand why they’re banging on about this. I don’t like using the word ‘stakeholder’, but just this once – if you want stakeholders to support you, make sure they have a stake in your project.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago

Freedom and wealth aren’t the same thing. Both are of value, but the idea that because you are poor you might as well give up on your freedoms as well is morally and philosophically suspect! In fact some of the poorest people did worse our of lockdowns and were in practice much more likely to break the rules, whether willingly or not

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

Indeed. I hate to think what it must have been like for poor families stuck in apartments, without easy access to green space.

Lockdown was miserable enough for those of us with gardens and pleasant walks on our doorstep.

While we sat at our laptops and ordered our food, millions of people were forced to wear masks for hours on end, as a condition of employment (and let’s not forget those who were forced out of their jobs for refusing the vaccine).

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

Thank you voicing some compassion for those who had to work be-masked day in and day out to serve others, like nurses fo instance There’s been much contempt expressed here for those of us whose who chose to get vaxed and wear masks, a kind of inverted snobbery. And a strong tone of patronizing of the poor.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

IF you chose to get vaccinated for such reasons you deserve a medal. However, many NHS workers (at least if the demo I bumped into in Birmingham was anything to go by) refused and were sacked. Curiously the BBC when it came to those NHS workers, didn’t have that as a headline, in fact I can’t remember them covering it much at all. The other aspect of the NHS was the wearing of masks. After an accident (not driving/seat belt related) I was in A&E for stitches ,I didn’t see a single member of the NHS staff obeying the mask rules. Mainly wearing them under nose, under chin, but also regularly touching them raising and lowering them, and in the 4 hours I sat watching them in A&E I didn’t see ONE replace a mask. Admittedly only a few were permanently in the view in the public or office area for long enough to be certain they didn’t, BUT if they did, they swapped under chin masks for under chin masks.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

IF you chose to get vaccinated for such reasons you deserve a medal. However, many NHS workers (at least if the demo I bumped into in Birmingham was anything to go by) refused and were sacked. Curiously the BBC when it came to those NHS workers, didn’t have that as a headline, in fact I can’t remember them covering it much at all. The other aspect of the NHS was the wearing of masks. After an accident (not driving/seat belt related) I was in A&E for stitches ,I didn’t see a single member of the NHS staff obeying the mask rules. Mainly wearing them under nose, under chin, but also regularly touching them raising and lowering them, and in the 4 hours I sat watching them in A&E I didn’t see ONE replace a mask. Admittedly only a few were permanently in the view in the public or office area for long enough to be certain they didn’t, BUT if they did, they swapped under chin masks for under chin masks.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

I agree re the apartments, I disagree re semi’s/gardens – lockdowns were so personal. Our lockdown with all the family home was brilliant. Those working from home got paid, worked the hours that suited, and we played board games most nights, in fact it was a great experience. BUT only because we had a garden, access to country walks, freedom to choose our hours, brilliant weather AND none of the tragic downsides that make it the evil it was. We were very lucky, except for one destroyed university post grad course. Though even that had a silver lining. The post-grad is so disillusioned with the Wokeness of science and its corruption that even they are not too upset as they are packing in science as a career.
Oh, I also forgot, i wasn’t ignorant of the economic consequences of QE/Low interest rates and the potential disaster of Net Zero so 5 or so years ago began to hedge my bets re pensions/money etc with precious metals. The clue so far as I can tell is, read the MSM but don’t believe a word they say without alternative often narrowly focused sources such as industry magazines etc and alternative voices. Some are con-men, BUT a little thought, more reading and some reasoning has worked well for me so far in deciding who I believe and acting accordingly.
One thing is now clear however, the West is heading to a dark place, may even be there. For the UK at the next GE IF we can’t reverse it (and I fear we won’t unless the real economic consequences have fully hit home by then) we’ll not do so by voting for any of the existing parties UNLESS we do so by voting for the party who doesn’t own the sitting MP. A complete clearout of sitting MPs MIGHT concentrate minds, but I doubt that will happen. My hope is that the Red Wall seats will again decide to screw the main parties who took them for granted and so vote Reform. Those much maligned voters gave Boris and the Tories a chance to change our direction, and Boris proved not up to the job. He was as he portrayed himself, an egotistical clown. That sadly may have disillusioned the Red Wall. I hope not, IF they vote Reform, then that is a start, not that I’m supportive of all their policies.

Last edited 1 year ago by Simon Simple
Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

All true, but rejecting Tories would deliver Labour government.
In what sense would that be better outcome?
Labour supported covid measures and their only objections were that measures were not stricter, wider and of longer duration.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

All true, but rejecting Tories would deliver Labour government.
In what sense would that be better outcome?
Labour supported covid measures and their only objections were that measures were not stricter, wider and of longer duration.

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

But why did you stay in your house and garden and order food online. Everyone was allowed to go out to get food and take exercise.. If you walk to the shops every day with a shopping trolley and if the way to the shops lies through your local park and if the weather is sunny every day. At my local Aldi + Tesco those were packed every day,and I’ll tell you who with,all the local bolshy,opinionated,characterful 80+ years old. They blocked the aisles in convivial chatting groups and pushed in front of you to get stuff off the shelf. These grannies and grandpas didn’t give a stuff about distancing and were definitely not afraid of potential granny killers like me. On the day Boris announced that picnicking in the park was illegal I did that very thing and in full view of the police car that drove past me and ignored me,as I knew they would.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

Yes, I despise my former friends for happily supporting lockdowns as members of laptop class.
But expecting others to carry out working in food production, distribution and retail to provide for their needs.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

Thank you voicing some compassion for those who had to work be-masked day in and day out to serve others, like nurses fo instance There’s been much contempt expressed here for those of us whose who chose to get vaxed and wear masks, a kind of inverted snobbery. And a strong tone of patronizing of the poor.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

I agree re the apartments, I disagree re semi’s/gardens – lockdowns were so personal. Our lockdown with all the family home was brilliant. Those working from home got paid, worked the hours that suited, and we played board games most nights, in fact it was a great experience. BUT only because we had a garden, access to country walks, freedom to choose our hours, brilliant weather AND none of the tragic downsides that make it the evil it was. We were very lucky, except for one destroyed university post grad course. Though even that had a silver lining. The post-grad is so disillusioned with the Wokeness of science and its corruption that even they are not too upset as they are packing in science as a career.
Oh, I also forgot, i wasn’t ignorant of the economic consequences of QE/Low interest rates and the potential disaster of Net Zero so 5 or so years ago began to hedge my bets re pensions/money etc with precious metals. The clue so far as I can tell is, read the MSM but don’t believe a word they say without alternative often narrowly focused sources such as industry magazines etc and alternative voices. Some are con-men, BUT a little thought, more reading and some reasoning has worked well for me so far in deciding who I believe and acting accordingly.
One thing is now clear however, the West is heading to a dark place, may even be there. For the UK at the next GE IF we can’t reverse it (and I fear we won’t unless the real economic consequences have fully hit home by then) we’ll not do so by voting for any of the existing parties UNLESS we do so by voting for the party who doesn’t own the sitting MP. A complete clearout of sitting MPs MIGHT concentrate minds, but I doubt that will happen. My hope is that the Red Wall seats will again decide to screw the main parties who took them for granted and so vote Reform. Those much maligned voters gave Boris and the Tories a chance to change our direction, and Boris proved not up to the job. He was as he portrayed himself, an egotistical clown. That sadly may have disillusioned the Red Wall. I hope not, IF they vote Reform, then that is a start, not that I’m supportive of all their policies.

Last edited 1 year ago by Simon Simple
jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

But why did you stay in your house and garden and order food online. Everyone was allowed to go out to get food and take exercise.. If you walk to the shops every day with a shopping trolley and if the way to the shops lies through your local park and if the weather is sunny every day. At my local Aldi + Tesco those were packed every day,and I’ll tell you who with,all the local bolshy,opinionated,characterful 80+ years old. They blocked the aisles in convivial chatting groups and pushed in front of you to get stuff off the shelf. These grannies and grandpas didn’t give a stuff about distancing and were definitely not afraid of potential granny killers like me. On the day Boris announced that picnicking in the park was illegal I did that very thing and in full view of the police car that drove past me and ignored me,as I knew they would.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

Yes, I despise my former friends for happily supporting lockdowns as members of laptop class.
But expecting others to carry out working in food production, distribution and retail to provide for their needs.

Andrew McDonald
Andrew McDonald
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

Ah. The best things in life are free, eh? Poverty does have some drawbacks tho – I’m not saying that people ‘give up on their freedoms’ so much as pointing out that (say) now all the libraries are closing, if you want to read a book and enjoy some new thoughts, you’ll have to buy the book. If you want to get into town, now that all the public transport around here is gone, you just – can’t. A load of our mid-century assumptions about free access to one sort of culture or another have been hacked to death over the last twenty years. Stand up and fight for your rights! But the park is closed to demonstrations and has been flogged off to private concert promoters for 12 weekends out of the next 13…and so on. And you’re right that in practice the less wealthy had to break lockdown rules more than the asset-rich (who could break the rules in private anyway…)

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

Two points re your views
a) IF you buy the book, and it is printed, then you won’t have to be baffled at the sudden disappearance of characters you liked, situations that appealed and words you thought accurate. Also you won’t have to try and get the Librarian to find you a copy of the printed book that had all those things in when originally printed.
b) The City center won’t survive without public transport, as most of us won’t be forking out the £10 a time to simply travel into the ULEZ or whatever our local highway robbery scam is called.
The answer is either vote for Reform – only because they currently have no MPs and are hated by the main stream – so a two fingers via a ballot is reason enough for me.
OR a thing I wish might happen. Millions go into the polling station and collect their ballot paper BUT with a previously folder piece of paper hidden in pocket. The take their ballot paper and replace it with said smuggled piece so they have something to put in the ballot box, then they take the ballot paper home scribble NONE OF THE ABOVE across it and send it in an unstamped envelope to 10 Downing street.
Once in the post-box it becomes Royal Mail, has to be delivered, BUT the recipient has to pay. Now I know the BBC would try and avoid reporting on it, but I’m willing to bet the Post Office couldn’t conceal the fact IF enough people did it. If nothing else, it would annoy 10 Downing Street and HMRC.

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

That sounds a great idea. I was going to spoil my ballot paper anyway. This sounds even more effective and annoying.

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

That sounds a great idea. I was going to spoil my ballot paper anyway. This sounds even more effective and annoying.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

Two points re your views
a) IF you buy the book, and it is printed, then you won’t have to be baffled at the sudden disappearance of characters you liked, situations that appealed and words you thought accurate. Also you won’t have to try and get the Librarian to find you a copy of the printed book that had all those things in when originally printed.
b) The City center won’t survive without public transport, as most of us won’t be forking out the £10 a time to simply travel into the ULEZ or whatever our local highway robbery scam is called.
The answer is either vote for Reform – only because they currently have no MPs and are hated by the main stream – so a two fingers via a ballot is reason enough for me.
OR a thing I wish might happen. Millions go into the polling station and collect their ballot paper BUT with a previously folder piece of paper hidden in pocket. The take their ballot paper and replace it with said smuggled piece so they have something to put in the ballot box, then they take the ballot paper home scribble NONE OF THE ABOVE across it and send it in an unstamped envelope to 10 Downing street.
Once in the post-box it becomes Royal Mail, has to be delivered, BUT the recipient has to pay. Now I know the BBC would try and avoid reporting on it, but I’m willing to bet the Post Office couldn’t conceal the fact IF enough people did it. If nothing else, it would annoy 10 Downing Street and HMRC.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

The key phrase there is ‘break rules’ – once you are doing that , you are happy enough, so you just carry on under the radar. That is what happens in states like Soviet Russia etc, Argentina where the Police when ‘off duty’ get paid to guard the illegal ‘dollar exchanges’ that make life liveable under incompetent and corrupt Governments. It is happening here too, the issue is the ‘narks’ who’d spy on you, so that’s why you break the law surreptitiously. So why am I broadcasting it? Well, the more of us who do it, the quicker the official edifice collapses, and anyway, I don’t believe anyone is going to hunt me down over this, they are too busy stopping silent prayer. Even if they did, I’d obey until out of sight. 😉

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

Indeed. I hate to think what it must have been like for poor families stuck in apartments, without easy access to green space.

Lockdown was miserable enough for those of us with gardens and pleasant walks on our doorstep.

While we sat at our laptops and ordered our food, millions of people were forced to wear masks for hours on end, as a condition of employment (and let’s not forget those who were forced out of their jobs for refusing the vaccine).

Andrew McDonald
Andrew McDonald
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

Ah. The best things in life are free, eh? Poverty does have some drawbacks tho – I’m not saying that people ‘give up on their freedoms’ so much as pointing out that (say) now all the libraries are closing, if you want to read a book and enjoy some new thoughts, you’ll have to buy the book. If you want to get into town, now that all the public transport around here is gone, you just – can’t. A load of our mid-century assumptions about free access to one sort of culture or another have been hacked to death over the last twenty years. Stand up and fight for your rights! But the park is closed to demonstrations and has been flogged off to private concert promoters for 12 weekends out of the next 13…and so on. And you’re right that in practice the less wealthy had to break lockdown rules more than the asset-rich (who could break the rules in private anyway…)

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

The key phrase there is ‘break rules’ – once you are doing that , you are happy enough, so you just carry on under the radar. That is what happens in states like Soviet Russia etc, Argentina where the Police when ‘off duty’ get paid to guard the illegal ‘dollar exchanges’ that make life liveable under incompetent and corrupt Governments. It is happening here too, the issue is the ‘narks’ who’d spy on you, so that’s why you break the law surreptitiously. So why am I broadcasting it? Well, the more of us who do it, the quicker the official edifice collapses, and anyway, I don’t believe anyone is going to hunt me down over this, they are too busy stopping silent prayer. Even if they did, I’d obey until out of sight. 😉

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago

Freedom and wealth aren’t the same thing. Both are of value, but the idea that because you are poor you might as well give up on your freedoms as well is morally and philosophically suspect! In fact some of the poorest people did worse our of lockdowns and were in practice much more likely to break the rules, whether willingly or not

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

The problem with this analysis is that many of the very people losing out from skewed income distributions, asset price bubbles etc, lost out even more over lockdowns. Especially people working in small businesses and the young. The people who essentially found them easy to accept, even enjoy, owned their own houses, may well have had gardens, could “work from home” (either with or without the quotation marks!) had more access to government support etc etc.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

I agree. It was the working poor hardest hit by lockdowns. Would be interesting to see poll results broken down by income level.

Heidi Mahon
Heidi Mahon
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Yes I was one of the many working poor affected ,none of the do gooders stepped forward to pay my bills when I lost my self employed income overnight,this was all about “protecting “at all costs the affluent elderly and their neurotic aforementioned spinster and batchelor offspring

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi Mahon

So sorry to hear that Heidi. And no one cares. The laptop class was not affected at all – other than no longer needing to commute to work. We deserve better.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Exactly. Covid created a new independant, easier way to work for the laptopers, which has continued. A whole new lifestyle.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I can assure you, for at least ‘one laptopper’ I know, more office time would be welcomed.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I can assure you, for at least ‘one laptopper’ I know, more office time would be welcomed.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

The ‘lap-top’ class includes committed anti-lockdowners. That’s the problem with ‘Set Theory’ when only applied to a set, the intersection of Sets is a reality and the main ‘offenders’ in most political issues are in an intersections of sets. That we broad brush blame a set or a Union of them is problematic.
Note the intersection is small, the more sets intersecting, doesn’t necessarily mean the intersection is small, but more often than not the more intersecting sets, the smaller the set of all intersecting is! Perhaps only a few hundred in the Commons need to be replaced to bring down the woke edifice?
https://math.libretexts.org/Courses/Monroe_Community_College/MTH_220_Discrete_Math/4%3A_Sets/4.3%3A_Unions_and_Intersections

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Exactly. Covid created a new independant, easier way to work for the laptopers, which has continued. A whole new lifestyle.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

The ‘lap-top’ class includes committed anti-lockdowners. That’s the problem with ‘Set Theory’ when only applied to a set, the intersection of Sets is a reality and the main ‘offenders’ in most political issues are in an intersections of sets. That we broad brush blame a set or a Union of them is problematic.
Note the intersection is small, the more sets intersecting, doesn’t necessarily mean the intersection is small, but more often than not the more intersecting sets, the smaller the set of all intersecting is! Perhaps only a few hundred in the Commons need to be replaced to bring down the woke edifice?
https://math.libretexts.org/Courses/Monroe_Community_College/MTH_220_Discrete_Math/4%3A_Sets/4.3%3A_Unions_and_Intersections

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi Mahon

just to correct one thing there. It was NOT to protect the affluent elderly. It was to protect politicians and an establishment. IF the elderly were to be protected they’d not have emptied hospitals into care homes without tests. The scandals of Care Home deaths has not been addressed in either Wales or Scotland (and not much about it at all in England) It appears to have been brushed under the carpet. The Gammon were a convenient scapegoat for Brexit , they became an equally convenient excuse for lockdown. Neither is true.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi Mahon

So sorry to hear that Heidi. And no one cares. The laptop class was not affected at all – other than no longer needing to commute to work. We deserve better.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi Mahon

just to correct one thing there. It was NOT to protect the affluent elderly. It was to protect politicians and an establishment. IF the elderly were to be protected they’d not have emptied hospitals into care homes without tests. The scandals of Care Home deaths has not been addressed in either Wales or Scotland (and not much about it at all in England) It appears to have been brushed under the carpet. The Gammon were a convenient scapegoat for Brexit , they became an equally convenient excuse for lockdown. Neither is true.

Heidi Mahon
Heidi Mahon
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Yes I was one of the many working poor affected ,none of the do gooders stepped forward to pay my bills when I lost my self employed income overnight,this was all about “protecting “at all costs the affluent elderly and their neurotic aforementioned spinster and batchelor offspring

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

EXACTLY!!!

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

I agree. It was the working poor hardest hit by lockdowns. Would be interesting to see poll results broken down by income level.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

EXACTLY!!!

Tony Taylor
Tony Taylor
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

That’s a depressingly plausible opinion.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

“panem et circenses.”*

(* Juvenal. Book IV. Satire 10.81.)

Stephen Clow
Stephen Clow
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

I think that’s a very perceptive view.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Clow

Which one?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Clow

Which one?

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

That explanation rings very true

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Thats a true analysis and I’m one of those people who is happy with a modest income (state pension – for how long)and just quietly potter about my life as I always have. Yet I was a total rebel and unbeliever from the start. I knew and know what theyre at.
But I’m not going to rip up the pavements and throw fireworks.

Russell Hamilton
Russell Hamilton
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

I guess we eased into it – compulsory seatbelt wearing in cars seemed a good idea, bicycle helmets (a little more controversial) similarly, but now, apparently, I need an Occupational Health & Safety person to come and check my office chair and tell me how to sit correctly on it.

Andrew McDonald
Andrew McDonald
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

‘ For some people, lockdowns did not represent a great loss of freedoms because their poverty meant those freedoms were largely theoretical.’

You can’t say that often enough. The decline of the civil state and the degradation of our common cultural capital over the last 30 years has left a huge population in the UK which has nothing much in common with politicians and journalists, and doesn’t understand why they’re banging on about this. I don’t like using the word ‘stakeholder’, but just this once – if you want stakeholders to support you, make sure they have a stake in your project.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

The problem with this analysis is that many of the very people losing out from skewed income distributions, asset price bubbles etc, lost out even more over lockdowns. Especially people working in small businesses and the young. The people who essentially found them easy to accept, even enjoy, owned their own houses, may well have had gardens, could “work from home” (either with or without the quotation marks!) had more access to government support etc etc.

Tony Taylor
Tony Taylor
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

That’s a depressingly plausible opinion.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

“panem et circenses.”*

(* Juvenal. Book IV. Satire 10.81.)

Stephen Clow
Stephen Clow
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

I think that’s a very perceptive view.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

That explanation rings very true

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Thats a true analysis and I’m one of those people who is happy with a modest income (state pension – for how long)and just quietly potter about my life as I always have. Yet I was a total rebel and unbeliever from the start. I knew and know what theyre at.
But I’m not going to rip up the pavements and throw fireworks.

J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago

I believe many people in the West are tired of the struggle to live the lifestyle that is relentlessly sold to us, from our earliest years, by TV, the internet, movies, advertising in general. So many people simply can’t make a wage high enough to support a moderately affluent lifestyle. Our parents and, more likely, grandparents could afford “the great American dream” during the post-WWII boom, but no longer. The well-paid jobs are largely off-shored or consumed by technology.
Instinctively people sensed this change in economic reality, then along came covid, lockdowns, and extensive government financial support. For many people this represented the beginning of the future where most depend on government handouts while few of us do specialized, well compensated jobs to generate government tax revenue. For some people, lockdowns did not represent a great loss of freedoms because their poverty meant those freedoms were largely theoretical.
From my perspective, the greatest accomplishment of thirty years of globalism and neoliberal economics is to demoralize people to the point where all they want is some form of modest, guaranteed income and a reasonably stable life even if they must turn responsibility for much of their life over to the government. That’s not a desirable outcome but I suspect it’s where we are.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago

Fortunately, I believe this poll is not truly representative of the average attitude in Britain, but there is a very dangerous trend of people absolving themselves of guilt and it needs to stop. Piers Morgan did it on Triggernomotry. Aaron Bastani did it last night at UnHerd Lates. It’s the attitude of “Well, our thinking was okay, it was just that we didn’t know the lethality of the virus.” Even worse is Morgan saying, “Well, if you had a jab that was 100% effective at reducing transmission, it would be okay to mandate it and punish those who didn’t take it.” NO! The conditions are immaterial. It is NEVER okay for the state to mandate whether or not you can see and hug someone you love. It is NEVER okay for people to be coerced – even blackmailed – into putting something into their bodies. It is bizarre how the “my body, my choice” campaigners had no problem demanded that others put a mask on their faces or get injected with a new drug with unknown long-term effects. If we don’t stamp out this notion of violating bodily autonomy or giving the state powers to dictate whether or not we can take our children to the park or visit our elderly relatives, we are in big, big trouble. Everything that was done under state diktat during the past three years was ultra vires and we need to have an urgent conversation about that. Big tech in collusion with nefarious state actors are desperate to usher in “digital IDs” to monitor and control our every move, and attitudes like we’ve seen from members of the covid cult are enabling this power grab. It needs to stop NOW!
I know a great many people who never took a test, never wore a mask, never stayed at home, never avoided their loved ones, never stopped hugging people and never took a single jab. Hell, they even purposely walked the wrong way around “one-way” systems. Why? Because they are intelligent human beings who looked at the available data, looked at history and said – this is going to end very badly. And today they are all super healthy, while the multiple-jabbed are dropping like flies and developing all manner of nasty illnesses and diseases. So, no, Piers Morgan, the “science” did not change. What happened was people lost their minds. They need to admit that and start apologising. That’s the first step on the road to recovery. Otherwise we are going to go through all this again when the state announces “climate lockdowns” or “nuclear war lockdowns”. We need to grow up and take responsibility for ourselves as individuals and never again let the state dictate what we do to our bodies or our loved ones.

Nanu Mitchell
Nanu Mitchell
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Hurray! Thank you for voicing my thoughts and feelings

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

For women living in America the government has taken away the freedom to do what they want with their bodies. Lockdowns are mild by comparison.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

By that do you mean the ability to kill a fetus? Out of curiosity (I’m male) with all the variety of available contraceptives how does a woman conceive by accident if intent on not doing so, and they appear to do so in such numbers?
I’m only curious, because it never interested me that much (being male I guess) until I watched this man, Dr Levatino, explaining how he changed his mind about being an abortion doctor. He exaplains an abortion between 14 & 22 weeks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZXQBhTszpU
Quite how anyone could then consider abortion as a routine procedure is beyond me.
Sometimes life sets you up in a way you don’t like – genes you don’t get to choose, so male/female is your lot, and one has to work around that. Now abortion may be a workaround, but dear God (and I don’t believe in any!) shouldn’t there be some acknowledgement that what that doctor describes here is barbaric and regarding the life destroyed, maybe even protection for it against being destroyed?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

fetus?!!!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

fetus?!!!

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

What’s so great about a whoring lifestyle. Serves em right.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

By that do you mean the ability to kill a fetus? Out of curiosity (I’m male) with all the variety of available contraceptives how does a woman conceive by accident if intent on not doing so, and they appear to do so in such numbers?
I’m only curious, because it never interested me that much (being male I guess) until I watched this man, Dr Levatino, explaining how he changed his mind about being an abortion doctor. He exaplains an abortion between 14 & 22 weeks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZXQBhTszpU
Quite how anyone could then consider abortion as a routine procedure is beyond me.
Sometimes life sets you up in a way you don’t like – genes you don’t get to choose, so male/female is your lot, and one has to work around that. Now abortion may be a workaround, but dear God (and I don’t believe in any!) shouldn’t there be some acknowledgement that what that doctor describes here is barbaric and regarding the life destroyed, maybe even protection for it against being destroyed?

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

What’s so great about a whoring lifestyle. Serves em right.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

The problem with any argument for or against vaccines is the masses of evidence and facts that show what we actually have is the greatest vaccine trial in history, and no good evidence to support it (as Hancock reveals) So to argue we have ‘vaccines’ is/was illogical, we had possible vaccines. The evidence increasingly is we haven’t. None of these would have passed a normal vaccine trial. Fortunately, the pharma companies were indemnified over adverse effects. Which, Ironically was my first argument against the vaccines, IF Big Pharma wanted that, then I wasn’t going to touch any of them with a barge pole.
Here’s an interesting link, but so far I can’t find out who asked the question.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-responses-from-the-mhra-week-commencing-4-january-2021/freedom-of-information-request-on-covid-19-vaccine-liability-foi-20-532
Which links to this little bombshell – worth reading particularly IF this was available in Jan 2021 and hasn’t since been upgraded.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043779/Temporary_Authorisation_Patient_Information_BNT162_18_0_UK_Clean.pdf
I won’t bore you with all the evidence, but NO scientist who is honest can argue against this being a vaccine trial. A bit like any scientist espousing a position that means they label an opponent as a ‘denier’ is akin to wearing a headband with the message “I”m a liar and my hypothesis is fake.” Curiously Climate Scientists started this emasculation of science. Perhaps their myths will be the first to totally collapse? I hope so.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Great points! Thank you!

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Great points! Thank you!

Iris Violet
Iris Violet
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Thank you so much for saying exactly what I think, but better!

Nanu Mitchell
Nanu Mitchell
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Hurray! Thank you for voicing my thoughts and feelings

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

For women living in America the government has taken away the freedom to do what they want with their bodies. Lockdowns are mild by comparison.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

The problem with any argument for or against vaccines is the masses of evidence and facts that show what we actually have is the greatest vaccine trial in history, and no good evidence to support it (as Hancock reveals) So to argue we have ‘vaccines’ is/was illogical, we had possible vaccines. The evidence increasingly is we haven’t. None of these would have passed a normal vaccine trial. Fortunately, the pharma companies were indemnified over adverse effects. Which, Ironically was my first argument against the vaccines, IF Big Pharma wanted that, then I wasn’t going to touch any of them with a barge pole.
Here’s an interesting link, but so far I can’t find out who asked the question.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-responses-from-the-mhra-week-commencing-4-january-2021/freedom-of-information-request-on-covid-19-vaccine-liability-foi-20-532
Which links to this little bombshell – worth reading particularly IF this was available in Jan 2021 and hasn’t since been upgraded.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043779/Temporary_Authorisation_Patient_Information_BNT162_18_0_UK_Clean.pdf
I won’t bore you with all the evidence, but NO scientist who is honest can argue against this being a vaccine trial. A bit like any scientist espousing a position that means they label an opponent as a ‘denier’ is akin to wearing a headband with the message “I”m a liar and my hypothesis is fake.” Curiously Climate Scientists started this emasculation of science. Perhaps their myths will be the first to totally collapse? I hope so.

Iris Violet
Iris Violet
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Thank you so much for saying exactly what I think, but better!

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago

Fortunately, I believe this poll is not truly representative of the average attitude in Britain, but there is a very dangerous trend of people absolving themselves of guilt and it needs to stop. Piers Morgan did it on Triggernomotry. Aaron Bastani did it last night at UnHerd Lates. It’s the attitude of “Well, our thinking was okay, it was just that we didn’t know the lethality of the virus.” Even worse is Morgan saying, “Well, if you had a jab that was 100% effective at reducing transmission, it would be okay to mandate it and punish those who didn’t take it.” NO! The conditions are immaterial. It is NEVER okay for the state to mandate whether or not you can see and hug someone you love. It is NEVER okay for people to be coerced – even blackmailed – into putting something into their bodies. It is bizarre how the “my body, my choice” campaigners had no problem demanded that others put a mask on their faces or get injected with a new drug with unknown long-term effects. If we don’t stamp out this notion of violating bodily autonomy or giving the state powers to dictate whether or not we can take our children to the park or visit our elderly relatives, we are in big, big trouble. Everything that was done under state diktat during the past three years was ultra vires and we need to have an urgent conversation about that. Big tech in collusion with nefarious state actors are desperate to usher in “digital IDs” to monitor and control our every move, and attitudes like we’ve seen from members of the covid cult are enabling this power grab. It needs to stop NOW!
I know a great many people who never took a test, never wore a mask, never stayed at home, never avoided their loved ones, never stopped hugging people and never took a single jab. Hell, they even purposely walked the wrong way around “one-way” systems. Why? Because they are intelligent human beings who looked at the available data, looked at history and said – this is going to end very badly. And today they are all super healthy, while the multiple-jabbed are dropping like flies and developing all manner of nasty illnesses and diseases. So, no, Piers Morgan, the “science” did not change. What happened was people lost their minds. They need to admit that and start apologising. That’s the first step on the road to recovery. Otherwise we are going to go through all this again when the state announces “climate lockdowns” or “nuclear war lockdowns”. We need to grow up and take responsibility for ourselves as individuals and never again let the state dictate what we do to our bodies or our loved ones.

John Heggie
John Heggie
1 year ago

Lockdowns were the dry run for net zero. I suspect that to achieve net zero by 2050 our liberty will be severely curtailed. For millions lockdowns were enjoyable, millions were paid to do nothing and millions defrauded the over generous state.

Net zero will be a slow burn and people will slowly realise their life style will be severely affected longterm, very different from Covid. When the public rebel against net zero democracy itself will be “locked out”.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

Superb! well said!

glyn harries
glyn harries
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

Absolute nonsense. Having masses of green energy rather than carbon energy makes no difference to our lives, except they are less polluted.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

Oh dear, – and when there is a drought and the wind doesn’t blow on a cold freezing night ,what renewable electricity is flowing then?
You really need to do some research, here is a starter which shows you just how naive any one who believes we can do without Nuclear and fossil fuels is.
https://www.withouthotair.com/synopsis10.pdf
Then if you want something more up to date, the Green Chicken is worth a read – though they now have a paywall for the hard facts as opposed to the entertaining free to all lead ins.
https://substack.com/profile/35017257-doomberg
Try, ‘Between a rock and a cold place’ – that is classic, but I like it because it cuts through the complacency and ignorance of “Absolute nonsense’ – climate scientists etc may lie, but the underlying science does not, and nowhere is it more damaging to climate myths than in the ‘renewables’ sector.
also try
‘here-we-go-again’
this exposes the battery myths. Dyson abandoned his EV because unlike many, batteries/motors and power are his bread and butter AND he quickly realised EV’s are simply uneconomical. The fact he is a vacuum manufacturer to start means he doesn’t have to bow down to the insane Net Zero policies of politicians, where motor manufacturers have little choice. Though wait and see how soon they start to revolt.
Go Green, Go Broke.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

Oh dear, – and when there is a drought and the wind doesn’t blow on a cold freezing night ,what renewable electricity is flowing then?
You really need to do some research, here is a starter which shows you just how naive any one who believes we can do without Nuclear and fossil fuels is.
https://www.withouthotair.com/synopsis10.pdf
Then if you want something more up to date, the Green Chicken is worth a read – though they now have a paywall for the hard facts as opposed to the entertaining free to all lead ins.
https://substack.com/profile/35017257-doomberg
Try, ‘Between a rock and a cold place’ – that is classic, but I like it because it cuts through the complacency and ignorance of “Absolute nonsense’ – climate scientists etc may lie, but the underlying science does not, and nowhere is it more damaging to climate myths than in the ‘renewables’ sector.
also try
‘here-we-go-again’
this exposes the battery myths. Dyson abandoned his EV because unlike many, batteries/motors and power are his bread and butter AND he quickly realised EV’s are simply uneconomical. The fact he is a vacuum manufacturer to start means he doesn’t have to bow down to the insane Net Zero policies of politicians, where motor manufacturers have little choice. Though wait and see how soon they start to revolt.
Go Green, Go Broke.

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

So very true, the noose is tightening around our freedom but disappointingly few seem to see it.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

Fortunately the cat is out of the bag on this one. Every day the counter narrative to the “net zero” cult strengthens. They hit a sweet spot of compliance with covid. It won’t happen again. It doesn’t matter that the masses are still delusional, the resistance has ENOUGH numbers to turn this around. Think Vietnam War. And pray!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Germany has a lot of automobile manufacturers, the closing down of many of the ‘core support’ industries such as metals smelting isn’t going to make life easier, and once the ban on ICE’s comes in, the motor manufacturers are going to go bankrupt. So it won’t happen, the question is who first tells the EU to get lost over its Green demands? Italy or Germany?

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Germany has a lot of automobile manufacturers, the closing down of many of the ‘core support’ industries such as metals smelting isn’t going to make life easier, and once the ban on ICE’s comes in, the motor manufacturers are going to go bankrupt. So it won’t happen, the question is who first tells the EU to get lost over its Green demands? Italy or Germany?

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

Net Zero effects are exploding into life now. The inconvenient truth is that the current financial crisis wasn’t actually the ‘slow burn’ effect of lockdown, That had started BUT it was ‘explosiive’ Net Zero and the failure of windmills and the Golden Child of renewables, Hydro, to provide enough power in 2021. (I think I’ve put links to industry reports in another post in this comments section) Net Zero’s gas price going stellar then kick-started it.
Lockdown effects are building up, BUT in the main we are experiencing the Net Zero consequences because Net Zero (in my opinion) also kick started the Ukraine war, which caused EU sanctions and the consequent solidifying of high energy price and the beginning of the de-industrialisation of Germany. Which will probably bring down the EU at some point. The piper needs paying, and Germany de-industrialised ain’t going to be able to afford it.
Ironically the Woke US isn’t quite as zealous as the EU appears to be, Biden having just signed off permission for ConocoPhillips to drill in Alaska.Though having said that Germany did demolish a town and a wind-farm to get at lignite, the dirtiest coal on the planet. So far though they are only getting desperate to keep the lights on, the don’t appear to be concerned at their ‘de-industrialisation’
Interesting times ahead.
PS The price of Gold as I write remains comfortably over £1600 an oz. It seems someone with lots of money doesn’t think that Credit Suisse takeover is the end of banking crises. Though my personal opinion is that in the UK at least, it is the pension funds who may be the most dangerous expositors to Government bonds. Unlike banks, they often have to sell either to meet margin calls OR to pay out. Banks could, perhaps not realise their bond losses by holding to maturity, pension funds may not have the same luxury.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

Superb! well said!

glyn harries
glyn harries
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

Absolute nonsense. Having masses of green energy rather than carbon energy makes no difference to our lives, except they are less polluted.

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

So very true, the noose is tightening around our freedom but disappointingly few seem to see it.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

Fortunately the cat is out of the bag on this one. Every day the counter narrative to the “net zero” cult strengthens. They hit a sweet spot of compliance with covid. It won’t happen again. It doesn’t matter that the masses are still delusional, the resistance has ENOUGH numbers to turn this around. Think Vietnam War. And pray!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  John Heggie

Net Zero effects are exploding into life now. The inconvenient truth is that the current financial crisis wasn’t actually the ‘slow burn’ effect of lockdown, That had started BUT it was ‘explosiive’ Net Zero and the failure of windmills and the Golden Child of renewables, Hydro, to provide enough power in 2021. (I think I’ve put links to industry reports in another post in this comments section) Net Zero’s gas price going stellar then kick-started it.
Lockdown effects are building up, BUT in the main we are experiencing the Net Zero consequences because Net Zero (in my opinion) also kick started the Ukraine war, which caused EU sanctions and the consequent solidifying of high energy price and the beginning of the de-industrialisation of Germany. Which will probably bring down the EU at some point. The piper needs paying, and Germany de-industrialised ain’t going to be able to afford it.
Ironically the Woke US isn’t quite as zealous as the EU appears to be, Biden having just signed off permission for ConocoPhillips to drill in Alaska.Though having said that Germany did demolish a town and a wind-farm to get at lignite, the dirtiest coal on the planet. So far though they are only getting desperate to keep the lights on, the don’t appear to be concerned at their ‘de-industrialisation’
Interesting times ahead.
PS The price of Gold as I write remains comfortably over £1600 an oz. It seems someone with lots of money doesn’t think that Credit Suisse takeover is the end of banking crises. Though my personal opinion is that in the UK at least, it is the pension funds who may be the most dangerous expositors to Government bonds. Unlike banks, they often have to sell either to meet margin calls OR to pay out. Banks could, perhaps not realise their bond losses by holding to maturity, pension funds may not have the same luxury.

John Heggie
John Heggie
1 year ago

Lockdowns were the dry run for net zero. I suspect that to achieve net zero by 2050 our liberty will be severely curtailed. For millions lockdowns were enjoyable, millions were paid to do nothing and millions defrauded the over generous state.

Net zero will be a slow burn and people will slowly realise their life style will be severely affected longterm, very different from Covid. When the public rebel against net zero democracy itself will be “locked out”.

Tony Taylor
Tony Taylor
1 year ago

Why doesn’t Britain regret lockdown?

The first priority of politics and publicity is to never admit you were wrong. The second priority is the first priority.

Tony Taylor
Tony Taylor
1 year ago

Why doesn’t Britain regret lockdown?

The first priority of politics and publicity is to never admit you were wrong. The second priority is the first priority.

Prashant Kotak
Prashant Kotak
1 year ago

Outstanding, and well done UnHerd throughout the period, for not losing your head, not sinking into paranoia, and giving a wide variety of perspectives a platform.

It is unsurprising that most people still don’t view the lockdowns as a big mistake. For one thing, those who bore the biggest psychological brunt, children and young adults, don’t have the articulation to explain their loss during formative years because they they don’t have reference points. Against that, the young are more capable of bouncing back from trauma so I’m still hopeful the long term effects won’t be as bad as I initially feared.

The material full cost across the board is still not perceived at a personal level – most people still expect a relatively swift cycle of recession followed by recovery. As an outright doomer though, I think the economic thumbscrews have only just started tightening in the form of higher inflation and higher interest rates but the core of the horrors are yet to come, and will last the next couple of decades. It will be like your granny being asked to go six rounds with George Foreman, not exactly a fair fight, but the outcome is not in doubt.

What also interests me are the reactions now, of our technocratic elites, to their own reactions at the start of the pandemic. I saw a bit of the triggernometry interview with Piers Morgan, who has a good sense of the direction of the public mood for very self-serving reasons, and I would suggest if a character as slippery as Morgan is shifting gears and expressing contrition (and for myself I don’t take his sincerity at face value for one second), then perhaps a big change in the way we collectively viewed the lockdowns is coming.

Last edited 1 year ago by Prashant Kotak
Prashant Kotak
Prashant Kotak
1 year ago

Outstanding, and well done UnHerd throughout the period, for not losing your head, not sinking into paranoia, and giving a wide variety of perspectives a platform.

It is unsurprising that most people still don’t view the lockdowns as a big mistake. For one thing, those who bore the biggest psychological brunt, children and young adults, don’t have the articulation to explain their loss during formative years because they they don’t have reference points. Against that, the young are more capable of bouncing back from trauma so I’m still hopeful the long term effects won’t be as bad as I initially feared.

The material full cost across the board is still not perceived at a personal level – most people still expect a relatively swift cycle of recession followed by recovery. As an outright doomer though, I think the economic thumbscrews have only just started tightening in the form of higher inflation and higher interest rates but the core of the horrors are yet to come, and will last the next couple of decades. It will be like your granny being asked to go six rounds with George Foreman, not exactly a fair fight, but the outcome is not in doubt.

What also interests me are the reactions now, of our technocratic elites, to their own reactions at the start of the pandemic. I saw a bit of the triggernometry interview with Piers Morgan, who has a good sense of the direction of the public mood for very self-serving reasons, and I would suggest if a character as slippery as Morgan is shifting gears and expressing contrition (and for myself I don’t take his sincerity at face value for one second), then perhaps a big change in the way we collectively viewed the lockdowns is coming.

Last edited 1 year ago by Prashant Kotak
Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago

So many people died, were forced to wear masks, be jabbed with experimental vaccines, had their freedoms curtailed, and received fines or loss of livelihood for not complying, while our governments and their media apparatus bullied and sneered at us. Can I forgive them? No, not until those who caused this are held accountable.

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago

So many people died, were forced to wear masks, be jabbed with experimental vaccines, had their freedoms curtailed, and received fines or loss of livelihood for not complying, while our governments and their media apparatus bullied and sneered at us. Can I forgive them? No, not until those who caused this are held accountable.

Edward Seymour
Edward Seymour
1 year ago

Like many, my life and views changed with lockdowns. I have to say mine has changed, philosophically and ethically, for the better (I think). As a result of Unherd, I have discovered Mathew Crawford, Mary Harrington and Paul Kingsnorth. I already had Roger Scruton in my life, but now through Paul Kingsnorth, I’ve discovered the beautiful writing and thoughts of Wendell Berry. Conservative thinkers like these show that all the great thinking about our lives is coming from “conservatives” but not conservatives or Conservatives as we know them. So for me I look back at what was a nightmare for many, as an intellectual re-birth for me. And this has shocked me since I am old and thought I knew everything!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Edward Seymour

Is unherd conservative?!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

far-right I expect, most things that oppose the status-quo are ALWAYS far right, some so far right they appear on the fringes of the left.

Jane Eyre
Jane Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

It wasn’t, it previously very balanced but unfortunately seems to be leaning further and further right. Time to cancel my subscription I think.

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Jane Eyre

Yes, you wouldn’t want to read opinions that differ from yours.

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Jane Eyre

Yes, you wouldn’t want to read opinions that differ from yours.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

far-right I expect, most things that oppose the status-quo are ALWAYS far right, some so far right they appear on the fringes of the left.

Jane Eyre
Jane Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

It wasn’t, it previously very balanced but unfortunately seems to be leaning further and further right. Time to cancel my subscription I think.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Edward Seymour

Is unherd conservative?!

Edward Seymour
Edward Seymour
1 year ago

Like many, my life and views changed with lockdowns. I have to say mine has changed, philosophically and ethically, for the better (I think). As a result of Unherd, I have discovered Mathew Crawford, Mary Harrington and Paul Kingsnorth. I already had Roger Scruton in my life, but now through Paul Kingsnorth, I’ve discovered the beautiful writing and thoughts of Wendell Berry. Conservative thinkers like these show that all the great thinking about our lives is coming from “conservatives” but not conservatives or Conservatives as we know them. So for me I look back at what was a nightmare for many, as an intellectual re-birth for me. And this has shocked me since I am old and thought I knew everything!

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

It would be interesting to have (or to have had) polling tracking the support for lockdowns the longer they went on/the more were imposed. I think Austria had 5 lockdowns in the end of varying length.
I supported the first one we had (March – April 2020) but then got increasingly sceptical as time went on. I can’t be the only one who felt like this, so the blanket “In retrospect, lockdowns were a mistake” seems a bit simplistic.
Yes, I agree: both the pandemic and Brexit have altered the way I view the world forever. I will be processing both of these things for a while yet.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

You were unlucky!

Over here in this benighted island we had one of the brightest minds available, Lord Jonathan Sumption KS, aided by that excellent journalist Peter Hitchens, to tells us what an absolute scandal the whole Lockdown hysteria represented.

Needless to say they went unheeded, and now we must reap the well deserved whirlwind, however we cannot say that we weren’t warned.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

No we didn’t have a Sumption. I do love Austria, but if it was an animal, it would be a sheep. We just seemed to trot on obediently into lockdown because everyone else was doing it…and because tbh it was quite frightening watching what was happening in Lombardy, not very far away – caused by a disease we didn’t understand at all at the time.
Like I said, I had my own reasons for agreeing with the first one and liked the freedom we had in the summer of 2020 because of it…but disliked that it was done without much discussion. A feeling which continued to get stronger as the pandemic progressed.
Let it be known that I did fall in love with Sweden’s Anders Tegnell a little bit. I like people who aren’t afraid to swim against the tide. It takes courage to do that and he must have been under huge pressure.

Last edited 1 year ago by Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Something which really annoyed me during that first summer (and which still annoys me now when I think about it)* was how the BLM marches were somehow exempt from criticism. We were all told to be distanced and behave…and anti-lockdown marches were viciously piled on to. Yet somehow, all that criticism seemed to evaporate and covid was no longer transmissible among righteous crowds whenever the ghost of George Floyd was hovering above them.
There really was no rational, consistent discussion to be had at that time.
(* so annoyed that I felt I had to go back just now and put a word into italics)

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

another Nobel Prize for voicing that one Katharine!

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Yes, that BLM nonsense. coupled with the apotheosis of the habitual criminal known as George Floyd, was the most ridiculous outburst of completely bogus mass hysteria that I have witnessed in many a year.

It was also a shocking reminder of how far the ‘Great Republic’* has degenerated in recent years.

(* Sometimes known as the USA.)

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Yes. Lady Liberty has “let herself go”…I’m picturing her with a childish clenched fist instead of a torch, her figure having slumped with indulgence into an approximation of Mr. Bibendo, and over her countenance one of those idiot placebo masks. But then, Washington DC is itself a gerontocracy.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Your ignorance never ceases to amaze me, Charles, but then you are of of course an old WASP. You just couldn’t pass on an opportunity to be racist even when it has nothing to do with the subject of lockdown.

Last edited 1 year ago by Clare Knight
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Racism is everywhere if you look for it. What about those 5 black police officers who beat a black man to death- racist everyone.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

what is racism?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

what is racism?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

the capital crime of daring to disagree with WoClare Knight of Darkness!!!

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Isn’t “old WASP” a display of ageist, racist and religious prejudice? To be anti-BLM has nothing to do with racism, many of African descent deplore it. It has everything to do with being anti-hate, though. BLM is hateful, divisive and opportunistically cynical, victimizing black people first, and making fools of virtue-signaling others.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Racism is everywhere if you look for it. What about those 5 black police officers who beat a black man to death- racist everyone.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

the capital crime of daring to disagree with WoClare Knight of Darkness!!!

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Isn’t “old WASP” a display of ageist, racist and religious prejudice? To be anti-BLM has nothing to do with racism, many of African descent deplore it. It has everything to do with being anti-hate, though. BLM is hateful, divisive and opportunistically cynical, victimizing black people first, and making fools of virtue-signaling others.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Yes. Lady Liberty has “let herself go”…I’m picturing her with a childish clenched fist instead of a torch, her figure having slumped with indulgence into an approximation of Mr. Bibendo, and over her countenance one of those idiot placebo masks. But then, Washington DC is itself a gerontocracy.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Your ignorance never ceases to amaze me, Charles, but then you are of of course an old WASP. You just couldn’t pass on an opportunity to be racist even when it has nothing to do with the subject of lockdown.

Last edited 1 year ago by Clare Knight
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

We could all have saved on vaccinations had we joined the BLM.

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

another Nobel Prize for voicing that one Katharine!

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Yes, that BLM nonsense. coupled with the apotheosis of the habitual criminal known as George Floyd, was the most ridiculous outburst of completely bogus mass hysteria that I have witnessed in many a year.

It was also a shocking reminder of how far the ‘Great Republic’* has degenerated in recent years.

(* Sometimes known as the USA.)

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

We could all have saved on vaccinations had we joined the BLM.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

You love Austria?!!!

Heidi Mahon
Heidi Mahon
1 year ago

Yes why not -its a beautiful country and quite unlike the UK very clean ,lived there as a child

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi Mahon

Agreed, but that is mainly because it doesn’t have a vast immigrant problem.
They were exterminated some time ago were they not?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Heidi Mahon

Agreed, but that is mainly because it doesn’t have a vast immigrant problem.
They were exterminated some time ago were they not?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Somebody has to.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

ghastly place

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

ghastly place

Heidi Mahon
Heidi Mahon
1 year ago

Yes why not -its a beautiful country and quite unlike the UK very clean ,lived there as a child

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Somebody has to.

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

He should get a Nobel Prize for Courage in the face of b……t!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

One wonderful explanation of Australia was this, and I paraphrase because I can’t find the link to the original.
“We are so shocked by Australia because we think that the descendants of the ‘Transported’ would not cower so easily to a threat, and authority. What we forget is , the descendants of the Guards may well be the ones running the show.”
Quite how tongue-in-cheek the original was is open to question.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

My brother used to work for Fiat, speaks Italian and had many friends in Nothern Italy.
Taking to them, it became obvious very quickly that those effected by covid very elderly, with many comorbidities, already on a way out….
There is no way that European governments including uk with all the security agencies at their disposal, were not aware of the true nature of the Chinese flue very early on.

Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew F
Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Something which really annoyed me during that first summer (and which still annoys me now when I think about it)* was how the BLM marches were somehow exempt from criticism. We were all told to be distanced and behave…and anti-lockdown marches were viciously piled on to. Yet somehow, all that criticism seemed to evaporate and covid was no longer transmissible among righteous crowds whenever the ghost of George Floyd was hovering above them.
There really was no rational, consistent discussion to be had at that time.
(* so annoyed that I felt I had to go back just now and put a word into italics)

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

You love Austria?!!!

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

He should get a Nobel Prize for Courage in the face of b……t!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

One wonderful explanation of Australia was this, and I paraphrase because I can’t find the link to the original.
“We are so shocked by Australia because we think that the descendants of the ‘Transported’ would not cower so easily to a threat, and authority. What we forget is , the descendants of the Guards may well be the ones running the show.”
Quite how tongue-in-cheek the original was is open to question.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

My brother used to work for Fiat, speaks Italian and had many friends in Nothern Italy.
Taking to them, it became obvious very quickly that those effected by covid very elderly, with many comorbidities, already on a way out….
There is no way that European governments including uk with all the security agencies at their disposal, were not aware of the true nature of the Chinese flue very early on.

Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew F
Dermot O'Sullivan
Dermot O'Sullivan
1 year ago

Needless to say they went unheeded.. and unheard!

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

No we didn’t have a Sumption. I do love Austria, but if it was an animal, it would be a sheep. We just seemed to trot on obediently into lockdown because everyone else was doing it…and because tbh it was quite frightening watching what was happening in Lombardy, not very far away – caused by a disease we didn’t understand at all at the time.
Like I said, I had my own reasons for agreeing with the first one and liked the freedom we had in the summer of 2020 because of it…but disliked that it was done without much discussion. A feeling which continued to get stronger as the pandemic progressed.
Let it be known that I did fall in love with Sweden’s Anders Tegnell a little bit. I like people who aren’t afraid to swim against the tide. It takes courage to do that and he must have been under huge pressure.

Last edited 1 year ago by Katharine Eyre
Dermot O'Sullivan
Dermot O'Sullivan
1 year ago

Needless to say they went unheeded.. and unheard!

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

That’s pretty much my position: a necessary precaution before we had recognisable patterns of morbidity/mortality (those who claim we had definitive patterns in March 2000 are being unscientific) but once the evidence started to flow, further lockdowns became a knee-jerk which ended up costing us more than we can contemplate.

There it is. No need for an inquiry at even more cost.

As Freddie Sayers writes: we’re changed. Perhaps we’re changed to an extent to which those generations which fought the two wotld wars were changed, but in more subhle ways.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

The patterns of mobility were set with Italy and the Diamond princess > 90% were over the average life expectancy and had at least one co-morbidity. The Diamond Princess, a floating petri dish which NEVER became a floating mortuary. Not that the MSM especially the BBC acknowledge it, any reference to either of those facts or Prof Henghan meant post removed for ‘dis-information’ The BBC licence fee needs scrapping now.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

The patterns of mobility were set with Italy and the Diamond princess > 90% were over the average life expectancy and had at least one co-morbidity. The Diamond Princess, a floating petri dish which NEVER became a floating mortuary. Not that the MSM especially the BBC acknowledge it, any reference to either of those facts or Prof Henghan meant post removed for ‘dis-information’ The BBC licence fee needs scrapping now.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Didn’t you support vaccine mandates in Austria? Checking my memory…

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

Yes, I did. I have since thought alot about it and have come to the conclusion that I do not go back on that and do not apologise for having held that opinion at the time.
But that is outside the scope of this discussion which is about lockdown.

Gerard A
Gerard A
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Vaccine mandates were one of the levers used in lockdowns and can’t separated from them

Fredrich Nicecar
Fredrich Nicecar
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

A Norwegian University study has found a direct correlation between Covid vaccine take up and excess deaths; so good luck Austria.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

You said you liked people who ‘swim against the tide’… hence my question! Curious that you supported people being forcibly injected with a questionable vaccine. Or they were completely isolated.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

It was a face off between two different interpretations off freedom. The non-vaccinated’s freedom to not be vaccinated vs. (at that time) our general freedom (from another lockdown). The situation at the time was that one freedom had to prevail over the other and I did not want that lockdown. Then omicron arrived which was massive luck and changed the game so the conflict between those two freedoms was no longer there, they could coexist

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

Voicing that opinion here is absolutely to swim against the tide.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

It was a face off between two different interpretations off freedom. The non-vaccinated’s freedom to not be vaccinated vs. (at that time) our general freedom (from another lockdown). The situation at the time was that one freedom had to prevail over the other and I did not want that lockdown. Then omicron arrived which was massive luck and changed the game so the conflict between those two freedoms was no longer there, they could coexist

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

Voicing that opinion here is absolutely to swim against the tide.

Iris Violet
Iris Violet
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

The mental gymnastics you must have done to continue to justify that are rather astonishing.

Gerard A
Gerard A
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Vaccine mandates were one of the levers used in lockdowns and can’t separated from them

Fredrich Nicecar
Fredrich Nicecar
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

A Norwegian University study has found a direct correlation between Covid vaccine take up and excess deaths; so good luck Austria.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

You said you liked people who ‘swim against the tide’… hence my question! Curious that you supported people being forcibly injected with a questionable vaccine. Or they were completely isolated.

Iris Violet
Iris Violet
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

The mental gymnastics you must have done to continue to justify that are rather astonishing.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

Yes, I did. I have since thought alot about it and have come to the conclusion that I do not go back on that and do not apologise for having held that opinion at the time.
But that is outside the scope of this discussion which is about lockdown.

Jane Eyre
Jane Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Very simplistic. I couldn’t possibly regret lockdowns and its not for lack of seeing the evidence. Do I regret it? No. Would I expect it to be handled differently if it were to happen again? Yes. Those are different questions.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

You were unlucky!

Over here in this benighted island we had one of the brightest minds available, Lord Jonathan Sumption KS, aided by that excellent journalist Peter Hitchens, to tells us what an absolute scandal the whole Lockdown hysteria represented.

Needless to say they went unheeded, and now we must reap the well deserved whirlwind, however we cannot say that we weren’t warned.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

That’s pretty much my position: a necessary precaution before we had recognisable patterns of morbidity/mortality (those who claim we had definitive patterns in March 2000 are being unscientific) but once the evidence started to flow, further lockdowns became a knee-jerk which ended up costing us more than we can contemplate.

There it is. No need for an inquiry at even more cost.

As Freddie Sayers writes: we’re changed. Perhaps we’re changed to an extent to which those generations which fought the two wotld wars were changed, but in more subhle ways.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Didn’t you support vaccine mandates in Austria? Checking my memory…

Jane Eyre
Jane Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Very simplistic. I couldn’t possibly regret lockdowns and its not for lack of seeing the evidence. Do I regret it? No. Would I expect it to be handled differently if it were to happen again? Yes. Those are different questions.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

It would be interesting to have (or to have had) polling tracking the support for lockdowns the longer they went on/the more were imposed. I think Austria had 5 lockdowns in the end of varying length.
I supported the first one we had (March – April 2020) but then got increasingly sceptical as time went on. I can’t be the only one who felt like this, so the blanket “In retrospect, lockdowns were a mistake” seems a bit simplistic.
Yes, I agree: both the pandemic and Brexit have altered the way I view the world forever. I will be processing both of these things for a while yet.

John Dellingby
John Dellingby
1 year ago

Given how high support was for lockdowns while they were ongoing or being lifted, I think more people are starting to question it seeing as nationwide support is down to the mid 50’s percentage wise. Soon, we may reach that point where the majority change their mind but for now, keep fighting the good fight.

John Dellingby
John Dellingby
1 year ago

Given how high support was for lockdowns while they were ongoing or being lifted, I think more people are starting to question it seeing as nationwide support is down to the mid 50’s percentage wise. Soon, we may reach that point where the majority change their mind but for now, keep fighting the good fight.

Albireo Double
Albireo Double
1 year ago

It’s a good article Freddy and I am right with you. But there is a huge, huge, flaw.
The question asked in the survey, and everything you have written ignores the fact that people were paid, while in lockdown. This is absolutely crucial – we basically gave the entire workforce a paid sabbatical – a lovely look at how an early retirement might feel. (And then people seem surprised that thousands of 50-somethings translated that into a real early retirement – but that’s an argument for another day). And we have handed the bill down to “someone else” to pay – our children and grandchildren will have to pay it, in fact.
So Freddy. Where was the survey question asking “Would you support lockdowns if there was no financial support offered to businesses or individuals?” Where was the survey question asking “Would you support lockdowns in the certainty that it would be deleterious to you health, your parents health, and the health and future chances of your children?
If you want the real answers, Freddy, you need to ask the right questions. You’ve asked an “Alice in wonderland question” – effectively this “Was it a mistake to give you months and months off work, on full, or nearly full pay?” And you seem surprised that people say they think it was a bloody great idea. Really Freddy?

Last edited 1 year ago by Albireo Double
Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Albireo Double

Excellent point! Thank you for this. Very true!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Albireo Double

Like the Brexit question, it may get Unherd of mentioned in the MSM. I guess someone has to pay to keep them going.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Albireo Double

Excellent point! Thank you for this. Very true!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Albireo Double

Like the Brexit question, it may get Unherd of mentioned in the MSM. I guess someone has to pay to keep them going.

Albireo Double
Albireo Double
1 year ago

It’s a good article Freddy and I am right with you. But there is a huge, huge, flaw.
The question asked in the survey, and everything you have written ignores the fact that people were paid, while in lockdown. This is absolutely crucial – we basically gave the entire workforce a paid sabbatical – a lovely look at how an early retirement might feel. (And then people seem surprised that thousands of 50-somethings translated that into a real early retirement – but that’s an argument for another day). And we have handed the bill down to “someone else” to pay – our children and grandchildren will have to pay it, in fact.
So Freddy. Where was the survey question asking “Would you support lockdowns if there was no financial support offered to businesses or individuals?” Where was the survey question asking “Would you support lockdowns in the certainty that it would be deleterious to you health, your parents health, and the health and future chances of your children?
If you want the real answers, Freddy, you need to ask the right questions. You’ve asked an “Alice in wonderland question” – effectively this “Was it a mistake to give you months and months off work, on full, or nearly full pay?” And you seem surprised that people say they think it was a bloody great idea. Really Freddy?

Last edited 1 year ago by Albireo Double
Francis Turner
Francis Turner
1 year ago

I was prepared to at least go along with lockdowns for the first couple of months until we understood more about the disease. By mid May it seemed clear that the deathrate from catching covid was low and limited to clear minorities of the population (the old and/or unhealthy) the rest of us were fine and the damage the policy was doing was far worse than the disease it was failing to prevent spreading.

Last edited 1 year ago by Francis Turner
Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Francis Turner

We knew all of that at the end of February, which is why “covid” was taken off the HCID list. By suggesting we “didn’t know”, the authorities were lying to the British public. You were tricked. That’s the scandal.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Francis Turner

Never in history have we locked down the healthy. There was quarantine at times for some diseases BUT there were for travellers potentially exposed. It was insanity and we knew it very quickly due to Diamond Princess data AND Italy. Yet we still did it! Boris partygate trial, ridiculous though it is, I see as about the only justice we’ll get on the authors of such a disaster.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Francis Turner

We knew all of that at the end of February, which is why “covid” was taken off the HCID list. By suggesting we “didn’t know”, the authorities were lying to the British public. You were tricked. That’s the scandal.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Francis Turner

Never in history have we locked down the healthy. There was quarantine at times for some diseases BUT there were for travellers potentially exposed. It was insanity and we knew it very quickly due to Diamond Princess data AND Italy. Yet we still did it! Boris partygate trial, ridiculous though it is, I see as about the only justice we’ll get on the authors of such a disaster.

Francis Turner
Francis Turner
1 year ago

I was prepared to at least go along with lockdowns for the first couple of months until we understood more about the disease. By mid May it seemed clear that the deathrate from catching covid was low and limited to clear minorities of the population (the old and/or unhealthy) the rest of us were fine and the damage the policy was doing was far worse than the disease it was failing to prevent spreading.

Last edited 1 year ago by Francis Turner
Mary Bairstow
Mary Bairstow
1 year ago

Great article and as Australians who had to endure forced quarantine policies on our difficult return from the UK in 2020 your voice and programs keep me sane!! It’s not only young people who are disillusioned with current governments.

Mary Bairstow
Mary Bairstow
1 year ago

Great article and as Australians who had to endure forced quarantine policies on our difficult return from the UK in 2020 your voice and programs keep me sane!! It’s not only young people who are disillusioned with current governments.

Alex Colchester
Alex Colchester
1 year ago

It’s a tricky one. We desire freedom, but we also desire almond milk chai lattes. We have been locked-down by our consumerist desires for a century and we barely notice.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago

It really isn’t that tricky! I note that often other people are considered brain-dead consumers while we make discerning choices of our own! The USSR had quite a lot less consumers choice than the modern day West; it wasn’t an ideal society.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 year ago

It really isn’t that tricky! I note that often other people are considered brain-dead consumers while we make discerning choices of our own! The USSR had quite a lot less consumers choice than the modern day West; it wasn’t an ideal society.

Alex Colchester
Alex Colchester
1 year ago

It’s a tricky one. We desire freedom, but we also desire almond milk chai lattes. We have been locked-down by our consumerist desires for a century and we barely notice.

Michelle Johnston
Michelle Johnston
1 year ago

I have completely lost faith in the institutions that influence and have power over our lives.
I followed Melbourne in real-time and watched as the deaths mounted in aged care facilities throughout the Lockdowns until they reached Johan Gieseke’s 3 to 1 flu target.
I spoke at length with people on the South Island of New Zealand and tried to make them understand that less than a thousand fit and healthy people died in the first year in the UK and they cross-correlated with medical staff and now they New Zealand have caught up 3 to 1.
When I returned to England briefly in the summer of 2021 it was clear anyone who had a front-facing job to make ends meet got on with it and saw getting another respiratory illness as less important than financial survival. Quite different from a woman who screamed at me for talking nonsense and who worked on her City job from South Devon using teams and zoom. Still, analysts and brokers are hidden behind their screens at home talking about a resurgence, and a lot of them rather like it.
The stupid thing is we knew who was vulnerable, we knew who needed to shield whilst the rest got on with their lives, and irony of irony the vulnerable, based on my experience still hide away. The Great Barrington Declaration is in place.
Let us also not overlook those who thought it was wise and benign are probably not just the middle class sat working from home but the overweight and obese.
Unherd has been a tiny light in the darkness and knowing I was right I have kept on living and had some of the best times of my life, simply playing the game of rules for a few days here and there. I have also spent a great deal of time urging my family forward and not to be defeated and to come out stronger from the Great Panic and they are knocking it out of the park. Promotions and achievement abound.
The Church of England, the BBC, The Left, The Modelers, and Sage matched the officer class of 1914 for dangerous stupidity. What about consequences, not a thing.

Last edited 1 year ago by Michelle Johnston
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

One group who I would love to hear from are the actuaries for say Life and Pensions Companies. A discussion with one of those on the data and perhaps Prof Doom’s modelling would get my vote.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

One group who I would love to hear from are the actuaries for say Life and Pensions Companies. A discussion with one of those on the data and perhaps Prof Doom’s modelling would get my vote.

Michelle Johnston
Michelle Johnston
1 year ago

I have completely lost faith in the institutions that influence and have power over our lives.
I followed Melbourne in real-time and watched as the deaths mounted in aged care facilities throughout the Lockdowns until they reached Johan Gieseke’s 3 to 1 flu target.
I spoke at length with people on the South Island of New Zealand and tried to make them understand that less than a thousand fit and healthy people died in the first year in the UK and they cross-correlated with medical staff and now they New Zealand have caught up 3 to 1.
When I returned to England briefly in the summer of 2021 it was clear anyone who had a front-facing job to make ends meet got on with it and saw getting another respiratory illness as less important than financial survival. Quite different from a woman who screamed at me for talking nonsense and who worked on her City job from South Devon using teams and zoom. Still, analysts and brokers are hidden behind their screens at home talking about a resurgence, and a lot of them rather like it.
The stupid thing is we knew who was vulnerable, we knew who needed to shield whilst the rest got on with their lives, and irony of irony the vulnerable, based on my experience still hide away. The Great Barrington Declaration is in place.
Let us also not overlook those who thought it was wise and benign are probably not just the middle class sat working from home but the overweight and obese.
Unherd has been a tiny light in the darkness and knowing I was right I have kept on living and had some of the best times of my life, simply playing the game of rules for a few days here and there. I have also spent a great deal of time urging my family forward and not to be defeated and to come out stronger from the Great Panic and they are knocking it out of the park. Promotions and achievement abound.
The Church of England, the BBC, The Left, The Modelers, and Sage matched the officer class of 1914 for dangerous stupidity. What about consequences, not a thing.

Last edited 1 year ago by Michelle Johnston
Ditta Bartels
Ditta Bartels
1 year ago

Great piece, thanks Freddie.
What about a follow up piece on the vaccines?
Best wishes
Ditta

Russell Hamilton
Russell Hamilton
1 year ago
Reply to  Ditta Bartels

Yes, the health establishment: I was opposed to lockdowns, though, in the event, was hardly affected at all. I wasn’t surprised at the government actions; what did change my sense of things was the actions of the health/scientific establishment. I never thought they were perfect but now I’m much more doubtful about any of their claims. And of course, social media didn’t come out of it well either.

We boomers already had our belief in government shattered 50 years ago with the Pentagon Papers etc.

Last edited 1 year ago by Russell Hamilton
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

Science was already corrupted. I blame Mann and the Climate scientists – their answer to anything appeared to be ‘denier’ – very scientific.
Thought there is a wonderful prescience in this talk from June 2019, on ‘Intelligent Design’. The subject may put people off BUT despite being an atheist the source of ‘Intelligence’ doesn’t necessarily put me off listening to the statistical arguments. Decades ago during my degree course, I found the Darwinian explanation lacking when it came to the ‘explosive evolutionary’ periods mentioned in these talks. I’m not sure they answer the question BUT they admit to there being a question to answer. Maybe the mulitverse is the only explanation and that it is chance built into the laws, but that’s not what I’m putting the link up for.
The interesting point in this talk and relating to ‘The Science’ and the issues covered in this topic is 39 mins in. So, move the tape to 39 mins and listen to the very prescient warning of what happened to History and English departments and fear of how science was next in line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noj4phMT9OE  
Mind you I can’t resist pointing out ironically it seems that a Theist (Christian World) can encourage science seeking truth, because I suppose they believed it would vindicate their faith, BUT an Atheist world cannot because they fear it might not vindicate theirs!
Cynic that I am, I find that amusing, and now I can take the mickey out of Religious Atheists because I’m an irreligious one. Though the thought of science perhaps providing, which is what its original Western Christian adherents sought, a proof of God is disconcerting.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

Science was already corrupted. I blame Mann and the Climate scientists – their answer to anything appeared to be ‘denier’ – very scientific.
Thought there is a wonderful prescience in this talk from June 2019, on ‘Intelligent Design’. The subject may put people off BUT despite being an atheist the source of ‘Intelligence’ doesn’t necessarily put me off listening to the statistical arguments. Decades ago during my degree course, I found the Darwinian explanation lacking when it came to the ‘explosive evolutionary’ periods mentioned in these talks. I’m not sure they answer the question BUT they admit to there being a question to answer. Maybe the mulitverse is the only explanation and that it is chance built into the laws, but that’s not what I’m putting the link up for.
The interesting point in this talk and relating to ‘The Science’ and the issues covered in this topic is 39 mins in. So, move the tape to 39 mins and listen to the very prescient warning of what happened to History and English departments and fear of how science was next in line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noj4phMT9OE  
Mind you I can’t resist pointing out ironically it seems that a Theist (Christian World) can encourage science seeking truth, because I suppose they believed it would vindicate their faith, BUT an Atheist world cannot because they fear it might not vindicate theirs!
Cynic that I am, I find that amusing, and now I can take the mickey out of Religious Atheists because I’m an irreligious one. Though the thought of science perhaps providing, which is what its original Western Christian adherents sought, a proof of God is disconcerting.

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
1 year ago
Reply to  Ditta Bartels

I just want to highlight the idea here that our comments in these threads should be thought of as personal notes to the authors. Can’t decide if it’s twee, or brilliant, or un-self-aware, or what.

Russell Hamilton
Russell Hamilton
1 year ago
Reply to  Ditta Bartels

Yes, the health establishment: I was opposed to lockdowns, though, in the event, was hardly affected at all. I wasn’t surprised at the government actions; what did change my sense of things was the actions of the health/scientific establishment. I never thought they were perfect but now I’m much more doubtful about any of their claims. And of course, social media didn’t come out of it well either.

We boomers already had our belief in government shattered 50 years ago with the Pentagon Papers etc.

Last edited 1 year ago by Russell Hamilton
Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
1 year ago
Reply to  Ditta Bartels

I just want to highlight the idea here that our comments in these threads should be thought of as personal notes to the authors. Can’t decide if it’s twee, or brilliant, or un-self-aware, or what.

Ditta Bartels
Ditta Bartels
1 year ago

Great piece, thanks Freddie.
What about a follow up piece on the vaccines?
Best wishes
Ditta

Jonathan Smith
Jonathan Smith
1 year ago

““In retrospect, lockdowns were a mistake.”

If you agree with the above statement, you are, I’m afraid, still in the minority.”

“Incompetence will produce an arbitrary response. It will NOT produce the inverse of an excellent response.

Question after question the advice was upside down. Stay inside. Wait to treat. Ignore natural immunity. Ignore Vit-D. Mask and Vaccinate your kids

Mistakes Were Not Made” ~ Bret Weinstein.

Discuss

Jonathan Smith
Jonathan Smith
1 year ago

““In retrospect, lockdowns were a mistake.”

If you agree with the above statement, you are, I’m afraid, still in the minority.”

“Incompetence will produce an arbitrary response. It will NOT produce the inverse of an excellent response.

Question after question the advice was upside down. Stay inside. Wait to treat. Ignore natural immunity. Ignore Vit-D. Mask and Vaccinate your kids

Mistakes Were Not Made” ~ Bret Weinstein.

Discuss

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago

It’s simple: you either believe in individual freedom of choice or you don’t. The pandemic made it quite clear that the majority of people prefer being told what to do rather than think for themselves. As a former educator this sends a chilling warning that we really need to get our education system back in order.

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

There was plenty of info around saying this was all for nought. I became anti lockdown based on what I read. I guess it’s a question of which writers and scientists one trusts.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Lee

Exactly, there was plenty of misinformation out there, still is.

Last edited 1 year ago by Clare Knight
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I get the impression you believe in US v Them and feel superior? 😉
Here’s the Welsh and English data as an FOI – check out the real figures v the MSM figures.
FOI Request Ref:FO1/2021/3249 – ‘Deaths of Covid with NO other underlying cause.’ – ie NO co-morbidities
England and Wales
Covid without co-morbidities (13/03/2020 – 7/1/2022): 17,371
65+:  13,957
under 65: 3,774
BUT the av age for death for Covid in 2021 = 82.5 ie +65’s were mainly over 82.5 (though the ave was for all UK)
Av life expectancy Male:79 Female:82.9
Media reports!
Same period:             127,704 Excess deaths
Deaths within 28 day of +ve test:   152,872 (up to 19/01/2022
Covid mentione on death certificate : 174,233
Feel free to point out which information in your view is ‘false’ 😉

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I get the impression you believe in US v Them and feel superior? 😉
Here’s the Welsh and English data as an FOI – check out the real figures v the MSM figures.
FOI Request Ref:FO1/2021/3249 – ‘Deaths of Covid with NO other underlying cause.’ – ie NO co-morbidities
England and Wales
Covid without co-morbidities (13/03/2020 – 7/1/2022): 17,371
65+:  13,957
under 65: 3,774
BUT the av age for death for Covid in 2021 = 82.5 ie +65’s were mainly over 82.5 (though the ave was for all UK)
Av life expectancy Male:79 Female:82.9
Media reports!
Same period:             127,704 Excess deaths
Deaths within 28 day of +ve test:   152,872 (up to 19/01/2022
Covid mentione on death certificate : 174,233
Feel free to point out which information in your view is ‘false’ 😉

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Lee

Exactly, there was plenty of misinformation out there, still is.

Last edited 1 year ago by Clare Knight
Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

That’s so not so. The antivaxers as a whole were/are not so bright.They’re the MAGA crowd in the US, big time followers.

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

What an odd comment to make.
Many Americans with PHD’s were among the most reluctant to get a Covid vaccination, and with good reason.
Your comment is just insulting to those who were not willing to just accept what pharma company shills and politicians were touting about a vaccine that, in the end, made little difference to transmission rates and infectivity, and carried a small, but real risk, of harm for a virus that would never affect 99% of the population.

Last edited 1 year ago by Louise Durnford
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

But were they right?

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

What an odd comment to make.
Many Americans with PHD’s were among the most reluctant to get a Covid vaccination, and with good reason.
Your comment is just insulting to those who were not willing to just accept what pharma company shills and politicians were touting about a vaccine that, in the end, made little difference to transmission rates and infectivity, and carried a small, but real risk, of harm for a virus that would never affect 99% of the population.

Last edited 1 year ago by Louise Durnford
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

But were they right?

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

There was plenty of info around saying this was all for nought. I became anti lockdown based on what I read. I guess it’s a question of which writers and scientists one trusts.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

That’s so not so. The antivaxers as a whole were/are not so bright.They’re the MAGA crowd in the US, big time followers.

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago

It’s simple: you either believe in individual freedom of choice or you don’t. The pandemic made it quite clear that the majority of people prefer being told what to do rather than think for themselves. As a former educator this sends a chilling warning that we really need to get our education system back in order.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago

Indeed, well-said.

However, it is all too easy for me to imagine a “next time”–not necessarily another lockdown because of a virus, but some other “state of exception” owing to an imagined threat (does anyone remember the Patriot Act?)–or even the pursuit of “equity.” Maybe that makes me a member of “the dissident class”? (I’m certainly “inured to being demonized and laughed at” and worse.)

At the same time, I can also imagine greater and better organized resistance to any curtailment of rights in the US.

I say this because privately, so many people would tell me they didn’t believe a word of what was going on. But, in so many cases, one co-worker, one roommate, one family member, one employee successfully held hostage everyone around them with their hysterical attitudes and demands. No one who experienced this can wish to repeat it–for it’s unnatural, like adolescents telling parents what to do.

Meanwhile, even in cities where restrictions remained in place, whole neighborhoods seemed to refuse to follow any restrictions whatsoever–crossing a certain street was like entering another world. And, of course, there was the surreal experience of going from one county, where mass gatherings joyously continued, to an adjacent one, where the people wore masks and stayed at home, leaving the streets empty and the atmosphere gloomy.

As time went on I met more and more people who claimed to have used fake “vaccine” cards (after all, how were these supposed to be verified?) to keep their jobs, or even just participate in normal life in places like NYC. And of course many people risked their jobs, or even gave them up over refusal to take the Wuhan flu shot–many more than the media would ever report. I believe priests were required to take the shots; I heard many who in any case preached against the fear and division underpinning such measures. Anyone who faced real consequences is likely to feel vindicated now, and better prepared for “next time.”

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

One intriguing thing that relates to the US and that appears to be contradictory to the UK as defined by polling for this article, is. The migration from the lockdown states to the non-lockdown. Perhaps many are like me, and they lie to questions from Pollsters? I lied through my teeth pre-brexit referendum whenever asked about the EU. I hope I came across with answers that the most obsessional Europhile would have given. I did that in the hope that many Brexiteers did so to ensure that the Remainers in power gave us a referendum. 🙂

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

One intriguing thing that relates to the US and that appears to be contradictory to the UK as defined by polling for this article, is. The migration from the lockdown states to the non-lockdown. Perhaps many are like me, and they lie to questions from Pollsters? I lied through my teeth pre-brexit referendum whenever asked about the EU. I hope I came across with answers that the most obsessional Europhile would have given. I did that in the hope that many Brexiteers did so to ensure that the Remainers in power gave us a referendum. 🙂

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago

Indeed, well-said.

However, it is all too easy for me to imagine a “next time”–not necessarily another lockdown because of a virus, but some other “state of exception” owing to an imagined threat (does anyone remember the Patriot Act?)–or even the pursuit of “equity.” Maybe that makes me a member of “the dissident class”? (I’m certainly “inured to being demonized and laughed at” and worse.)

At the same time, I can also imagine greater and better organized resistance to any curtailment of rights in the US.

I say this because privately, so many people would tell me they didn’t believe a word of what was going on. But, in so many cases, one co-worker, one roommate, one family member, one employee successfully held hostage everyone around them with their hysterical attitudes and demands. No one who experienced this can wish to repeat it–for it’s unnatural, like adolescents telling parents what to do.

Meanwhile, even in cities where restrictions remained in place, whole neighborhoods seemed to refuse to follow any restrictions whatsoever–crossing a certain street was like entering another world. And, of course, there was the surreal experience of going from one county, where mass gatherings joyously continued, to an adjacent one, where the people wore masks and stayed at home, leaving the streets empty and the atmosphere gloomy.

As time went on I met more and more people who claimed to have used fake “vaccine” cards (after all, how were these supposed to be verified?) to keep their jobs, or even just participate in normal life in places like NYC. And of course many people risked their jobs, or even gave them up over refusal to take the Wuhan flu shot–many more than the media would ever report. I believe priests were required to take the shots; I heard many who in any case preached against the fear and division underpinning such measures. Anyone who faced real consequences is likely to feel vindicated now, and better prepared for “next time.”

Juffin Hully
Juffin Hully
1 year ago

Great post, Freddie, thanks! It would be awesome if you could write here more. I like the personal touch, about the feelings after the lockdowns.
I am also feeling weary, but if we are to make our voice heard and cause some change then we have to keep the anger up.

Last edited 1 year ago by Juffin Hully
Juffin Hully
Juffin Hully
1 year ago

Great post, Freddie, thanks! It would be awesome if you could write here more. I like the personal touch, about the feelings after the lockdowns.
I am also feeling weary, but if we are to make our voice heard and cause some change then we have to keep the anger up.

Last edited 1 year ago by Juffin Hully
Giselle Durnford
Giselle Durnford
1 year ago

I can give you a very good reason as to why many of the “sheep” refused to countenance that lockdowns were a bad idea.
They would then need to take a good hard look at themselves and come to terms with the fact that they were reeled in, hook, line, and sinker.
This would also mean that they would then have to concede that, in many ways, they really were too stupid to think for themselves and oh so willing to abdicate this responsibility to others.
Do you honestly believe that such people would readily admit this to themselves, let alone others?
Not a chance, sadly…

Last edited 1 year ago by Giselle Durnford
Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago

It must be nice to be such a superior independent intellect that you can look down on the rest of us idiots.

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

It’s called common sense.
You should try it – Works wonders.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Exactly. There is a tone of superiority throughout these comments and an “us verus them” mentality which I have already observed in a previous comment. I appreciate your validation.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Did you look and not be convinced, or did you not look? I’m just curious, because from the first the Diamond Princess data was available. In fact the regular ‘mortality’ tables had at the start the Diamond Princess in the top ten, slowly descending, yet the data from it proved Covid was not the new black death, a perfect petri-dish. Perhaps that’s why the powers that be dumped the sick into care homes -“The Diamond Princess didn’t become a floating mortuary!”

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

It’s called common sense.
You should try it – Works wonders.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Exactly. There is a tone of superiority throughout these comments and an “us verus them” mentality which I have already observed in a previous comment. I appreciate your validation.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Did you look and not be convinced, or did you not look? I’m just curious, because from the first the Diamond Princess data was available. In fact the regular ‘mortality’ tables had at the start the Diamond Princess in the top ten, slowly descending, yet the data from it proved Covid was not the new black death, a perfect petri-dish. Perhaps that’s why the powers that be dumped the sick into care homes -“The Diamond Princess didn’t become a floating mortuary!”

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

Turns out that increasingly in times of trouble people need and want strong leadership, clear advice and guidance. Lockdowns were of course restrictive, but for many they were equally comforting. People speculate that there would be resistance to future lockdowns, I’ll wager it would be the opposite.

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

They were “comforting” to he middle classes who sat at home on furlough, baked bread, and played in their gardens.
They were most certainly not at all comforting to the whole group of people that had to provide for this selfish lot, whether supermarket store workers, delivery drivers, plumbers, electricians, factory workers, and the myriad others that contributed to your “comfort”.
If it hadn’t been for those souls, you wouldn’t have had any lockdowns because they simply wouldn’t have been feasible.
End of story.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

Agreed, I worked most of lockdown in that field, when I wasn’t working I was volunteering. My observations are an attempt to explain the poll result.

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

I understand that – It just makes me so angry that there are still people who think it was all a great idea!

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

I understand that – It just makes me so angry that there are still people who think it was all a great idea!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

EXACTLY, and don’t forget nurses who had to wear masks for 2 years.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

You are guilty of the ‘Set Theory’ issue I pointed out before, the Set of ALL middle classes intersects the set of “Lockdown Sceptics” – the fact my family had a great lockdown experience doesn’t mean we supported it, nor would I do so if it was proposed again.
In fact not only am I a member the “Lockdown Sceptics” set, I’ve also been a member of the “QE/Low interest/deficit spending sceptic’ set for some years, so have taken steps to mitigate that too. Which (If the gold price keeps heading up as it is, finally, after all those years of me wondering if perhaps the people I read on that had it wrong) means I’ll probably survive that too, but again it doesn’t mean I support any of that nonsense. But I get your drift as they say.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

Do please define middle classes?

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

Agreed, I worked most of lockdown in that field, when I wasn’t working I was volunteering. My observations are an attempt to explain the poll result.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

EXACTLY, and don’t forget nurses who had to wear masks for 2 years.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

You are guilty of the ‘Set Theory’ issue I pointed out before, the Set of ALL middle classes intersects the set of “Lockdown Sceptics” – the fact my family had a great lockdown experience doesn’t mean we supported it, nor would I do so if it was proposed again.
In fact not only am I a member the “Lockdown Sceptics” set, I’ve also been a member of the “QE/Low interest/deficit spending sceptic’ set for some years, so have taken steps to mitigate that too. Which (If the gold price keeps heading up as it is, finally, after all those years of me wondering if perhaps the people I read on that had it wrong) means I’ll probably survive that too, but again it doesn’t mean I support any of that nonsense. But I get your drift as they say.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

Do please define middle classes?

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

They were “comforting” to he middle classes who sat at home on furlough, baked bread, and played in their gardens.
They were most certainly not at all comforting to the whole group of people that had to provide for this selfish lot, whether supermarket store workers, delivery drivers, plumbers, electricians, factory workers, and the myriad others that contributed to your “comfort”.
If it hadn’t been for those souls, you wouldn’t have had any lockdowns because they simply wouldn’t have been feasible.
End of story.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago

It must be nice to be such a superior independent intellect that you can look down on the rest of us idiots.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

Turns out that increasingly in times of trouble people need and want strong leadership, clear advice and guidance. Lockdowns were of course restrictive, but for many they were equally comforting. People speculate that there would be resistance to future lockdowns, I’ll wager it would be the opposite.

Giselle Durnford
Giselle Durnford
1 year ago

I can give you a very good reason as to why many of the “sheep” refused to countenance that lockdowns were a bad idea.
They would then need to take a good hard look at themselves and come to terms with the fact that they were reeled in, hook, line, and sinker.
This would also mean that they would then have to concede that, in many ways, they really were too stupid to think for themselves and oh so willing to abdicate this responsibility to others.
Do you honestly believe that such people would readily admit this to themselves, let alone others?
Not a chance, sadly…

Last edited 1 year ago by Giselle Durnford
Jeff Dudgeon
Jeff Dudgeon
1 year ago

That same 50% of the population who find no fault with lockdown today had no financial interest in stopping it. Indeed most prospered and enjoyed much of the process e.g. pensioners, people on benefits, non-workers, public sector staff who could work at home, and devolved administrations like Sturgeon’s who knew the flow of money would not stop. Some with school age children or who were hurt by the restrictions probably hated it but believed it was necessary overall for society. Basically 30% of society mostly with difficult jobs worked on.
Those who supported the Swedish approach were derided or ignored. I long maintained where excess deaths were concerned it was not unlike a bad flu year when the UK has 50,000 excess deaths. In the event, it turned out to be two bad flu years on the trot rather than once every seven years.
The Hallett inquiry will only repeat the conventional wisdom – we were too late locking down.

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Dudgeon

How did pensioners and others on fixed benefits prosper?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Pingel

Not prosper it just didn’t make much difference.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Pingel

Not prosper it just didn’t make much difference.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Dudgeon

Perhaps, but some of the population that benefited financially from lockdown (my family) also found and still find great fault with it.
Re mortality, the ‘bad flu’ years deaths are usually caused by flu, the mortality of the Covid years has far darker roots, and you’ll not find many who were responsible wanting that to be investigated. Covid mortality was far less than claimed.
FOI Request Ref:FO1/2021/3249 – ‘Deaths of Covid with NO other underlying cause.’ – ie NO co-morbidities
For England and Wales NOT UK
Covid without co-morbidities (13/03/2020 – 7/1/2022): 17,371
65+:  13,957
under 65: 3,774
BUT the av age for death for Covid in 2021 = 82.5 ie +65’s were mainly over 82.5 (though the ave was for all UK)
Av life expectancy Male:79 Female:82.9
Media reports!
Same period:             127,704 Excess deaths
Deaths within 28 day of +ve test:   152,872 (up to 19/01/2022)
Covid mentioned on death certificate : 174,233

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Dudgeon

Are there any similar statistics for beards and IQ of beardies and non beardies?

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Dudgeon

How did pensioners and others on fixed benefits prosper?

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Dudgeon

Perhaps, but some of the population that benefited financially from lockdown (my family) also found and still find great fault with it.
Re mortality, the ‘bad flu’ years deaths are usually caused by flu, the mortality of the Covid years has far darker roots, and you’ll not find many who were responsible wanting that to be investigated. Covid mortality was far less than claimed.
FOI Request Ref:FO1/2021/3249 – ‘Deaths of Covid with NO other underlying cause.’ – ie NO co-morbidities
For England and Wales NOT UK
Covid without co-morbidities (13/03/2020 – 7/1/2022): 17,371
65+:  13,957
under 65: 3,774
BUT the av age for death for Covid in 2021 = 82.5 ie +65’s were mainly over 82.5 (though the ave was for all UK)
Av life expectancy Male:79 Female:82.9
Media reports!
Same period:             127,704 Excess deaths
Deaths within 28 day of +ve test:   152,872 (up to 19/01/2022)
Covid mentioned on death certificate : 174,233

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Dudgeon

Are there any similar statistics for beards and IQ of beardies and non beardies?

Jeff Dudgeon
Jeff Dudgeon
1 year ago

That same 50% of the population who find no fault with lockdown today had no financial interest in stopping it. Indeed most prospered and enjoyed much of the process e.g. pensioners, people on benefits, non-workers, public sector staff who could work at home, and devolved administrations like Sturgeon’s who knew the flow of money would not stop. Some with school age children or who were hurt by the restrictions probably hated it but believed it was necessary overall for society. Basically 30% of society mostly with difficult jobs worked on.
Those who supported the Swedish approach were derided or ignored. I long maintained where excess deaths were concerned it was not unlike a bad flu year when the UK has 50,000 excess deaths. In the event, it turned out to be two bad flu years on the trot rather than once every seven years.
The Hallett inquiry will only repeat the conventional wisdom – we were too late locking down.

JOHN KANEFSKY
JOHN KANEFSKY
1 year ago

(1) People don’t like admitting they are fools and have been fooled.
(2) People who do and make things, who were most affected by the lockdowns, are in a small minority compared to people who sit in offices or at home.

JOHN KANEFSKY
JOHN KANEFSKY
1 year ago

(1) People don’t like admitting they are fools and have been fooled.
(2) People who do and make things, who were most affected by the lockdowns, are in a small minority compared to people who sit in offices or at home.

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago

What a beaten dog article, cowering and beaten but still wagging the tip of the tail because maybe it will be forgiven, maybe it was a mistake….

HA! NO. It beat you because it is a psychopath and liked hurting you and owning you.

”We have had to grapple with the possibility that, through panic and philosophical confusion, our governing class contrived to make a bad situation much worse.”

HE*L NO! They did it out of Evil, Corruption, Power Mad, for $$. They did it like Stalin did to his people, and like Mao did to his….. They F_*ked the world and you and me and everyone else, up on Purpose. Most were Usefull Idiots – but not at the top…..Not at the Dark Force which exists and is making things go as they will.

Our Psychopathic Overlords decided it is ‘Great Reset Time’. Cocid-19 it 100% DARPA, it is a Bio-Weapon, same as the Vax is. Same as the Ukraine went from a regional policing conflict to WWIII to destroy the Old World Order.

But you see….they Own the MSM and Social Media, BBC+PBS, the IMF, the ECB, the Fed, the BofE, the World Bank, the WHO the Education Industry. The Government Uniparty in every democratic country is Owned by them. All industry – Bio-Pharma, Military-Industrial-Complex, the Ag-Complex, the global Finance, the Mega Corporations….

That is why the sheep remain sheep, every input they receive comes from out Psychopathic Overlords. Basically it is Trump in 2024, or the Iron Curtain Descends on the world Forever.

As O’Brien, the grand inquisitor said to Winston:

But always – do not forget this, Winston – always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – for ever.”

And remember the end? It was not enough to punish and kill Winston. He had to be tortured to the point of insanity, broken, to finally be made Love Big Brother – only when he learned to Love his tormentor did he get the welcome relief of the bullet in the back of his head…..He had to be owned to his soul, owning his body was not enough for Big Brother……he had to have god like power – listen to Yuval Noah Harari, this is the god like power their wicked and evil Transhumanism and AI interlink seeks…..

Remember in ‘That Hideous Strength’ when they can make humans live on for ever – the person high up tells Mark: ‘Yes, we can make one immortal; it is a gift which cannot be refused, and it does not have to be pleasant……

Freddy – what you say is incompetence – no it is Evil.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

This is the uncomfortable truth that very few people will ever be able to look squarely in the eye.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

I hope you’re wrong. BUT IF Net Zero isn’t abandoned they won’t survive it. It is however, always a matter of time, history shows for every Ozymandias, there will be
“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
……
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

This is the uncomfortable truth that very few people will ever be able to look squarely in the eye.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

I hope you’re wrong. BUT IF Net Zero isn’t abandoned they won’t survive it. It is however, always a matter of time, history shows for every Ozymandias, there will be
“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
……
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains.

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago

What a beaten dog article, cowering and beaten but still wagging the tip of the tail because maybe it will be forgiven, maybe it was a mistake….

HA! NO. It beat you because it is a psychopath and liked hurting you and owning you.

”We have had to grapple with the possibility that, through panic and philosophical confusion, our governing class contrived to make a bad situation much worse.”

HE*L NO! They did it out of Evil, Corruption, Power Mad, for $$. They did it like Stalin did to his people, and like Mao did to his….. They F_*ked the world and you and me and everyone else, up on Purpose. Most were Usefull Idiots – but not at the top…..Not at the Dark Force which exists and is making things go as they will.

Our Psychopathic Overlords decided it is ‘Great Reset Time’. Cocid-19 it 100% DARPA, it is a Bio-Weapon, same as the Vax is. Same as the Ukraine went from a regional policing conflict to WWIII to destroy the Old World Order.

But you see….they Own the MSM and Social Media, BBC+PBS, the IMF, the ECB, the Fed, the BofE, the World Bank, the WHO the Education Industry. The Government Uniparty in every democratic country is Owned by them. All industry – Bio-Pharma, Military-Industrial-Complex, the Ag-Complex, the global Finance, the Mega Corporations….

That is why the sheep remain sheep, every input they receive comes from out Psychopathic Overlords. Basically it is Trump in 2024, or the Iron Curtain Descends on the world Forever.

As O’Brien, the grand inquisitor said to Winston:

But always – do not forget this, Winston – always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – for ever.”

And remember the end? It was not enough to punish and kill Winston. He had to be tortured to the point of insanity, broken, to finally be made Love Big Brother – only when he learned to Love his tormentor did he get the welcome relief of the bullet in the back of his head…..He had to be owned to his soul, owning his body was not enough for Big Brother……he had to have god like power – listen to Yuval Noah Harari, this is the god like power their wicked and evil Transhumanism and AI interlink seeks…..

Remember in ‘That Hideous Strength’ when they can make humans live on for ever – the person high up tells Mark: ‘Yes, we can make one immortal; it is a gift which cannot be refused, and it does not have to be pleasant……

Freddy – what you say is incompetence – no it is Evil.

Paul MacDonnell
Paul MacDonnell
1 year ago

First-rate article.

Paul MacDonnell
Paul MacDonnell
1 year ago

First-rate article.

Richard 0
Richard 0
1 year ago

Fear and panic are the key words here. From very early on we knew the most vulnerable groups, so why on earth did all society have to lockdown? – no rational response, just fear and panic. Lots of people got paid to do nothing during lockdown and had a great time of it – they thought it great – more please! I have read that the average age for covid deaths is over 80. Even if 10 years younger than that, surely that is proof enough that whole-society lockdowns were a waste of time. I am certain, though, that if a similar event came along, whole-society lockdowns won’t happen – no country can ever afford to do so again.

Richard 0
Richard 0
1 year ago

Fear and panic are the key words here. From very early on we knew the most vulnerable groups, so why on earth did all society have to lockdown? – no rational response, just fear and panic. Lots of people got paid to do nothing during lockdown and had a great time of it – they thought it great – more please! I have read that the average age for covid deaths is over 80. Even if 10 years younger than that, surely that is proof enough that whole-society lockdowns were a waste of time. I am certain, though, that if a similar event came along, whole-society lockdowns won’t happen – no country can ever afford to do so again.

Lizzie J
Lizzie J
1 year ago

The problem with opinion polls is that they are hopelessly general and unnuanced in their questions. I ‘strongly agreed’ with the lockdown in March 2020 and ‘strongly disagreed’ with restrictions being reimposed once they were relaxed. Which box do I tick? The benefit of hindsight is a wonderful thing.

If there’s a next time I would again support a short period of restrictions until we know what we’re dealing with. I for one am grateful that the DRC border was closed, limiting the ebola outbreak.

I do agree that the ease with which most people are terrified into submission is much greater than I would have predicted.

One of my biggest frustrations is people’s selectivity. Did my very fat friend go on a diet? Of course not. Did he lecture us all that we had to wear masks? Of course he did.

Nowt so queer as folk, as my old dad used to say.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Lizzie J

DRC wasn’t global, it was the infected area – lockdown was everyone everywhere.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Lizzie J

DRC wasn’t global, it was the infected area – lockdown was everyone everywhere.

Lizzie J
Lizzie J
1 year ago

The problem with opinion polls is that they are hopelessly general and unnuanced in their questions. I ‘strongly agreed’ with the lockdown in March 2020 and ‘strongly disagreed’ with restrictions being reimposed once they were relaxed. Which box do I tick? The benefit of hindsight is a wonderful thing.

If there’s a next time I would again support a short period of restrictions until we know what we’re dealing with. I for one am grateful that the DRC border was closed, limiting the ebola outbreak.

I do agree that the ease with which most people are terrified into submission is much greater than I would have predicted.

One of my biggest frustrations is people’s selectivity. Did my very fat friend go on a diet? Of course not. Did he lecture us all that we had to wear masks? Of course he did.

Nowt so queer as folk, as my old dad used to say.

Bruce Luffman
Bruce Luffman
1 year ago

This a good piece by Freddy and I would say two words – cognitive dissonance. It has all the makings of a cult following and that thinking has been enforced by politicians not following science and using behavioural phsychologists to ‘bend’ people’s thinking that it was following science.
One of the reasons that the Governemtn could get away with it is highlighted in one of the comments in that most people did not suffer too much economically from the lockdown. Of course there is a huge cost but that is wrapped up in long term borrowings Secondly, most of the public is ignorant of figures and the appalling statistics and graphs used by the Government and the media went straight over people’s heads. This is clarly an indication of the latest education methods couple with a huge level of apathy in the general public.
The state knows best seems to be the mantra of most citizens and this is further exposed in the misunderstanding of the crazy Net Zero policy which is going to wreck our lives, if implemented, and make the Covid debacle look like a walk in the Park

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruce Luffman

The BBC actually misinterpreted some figures and graphs, and as soon as anyone pointed it out the comments section was closed or the offending graphic disappeared.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruce Luffman

The BBC actually misinterpreted some figures and graphs, and as soon as anyone pointed it out the comments section was closed or the offending graphic disappeared.

Bruce Luffman
Bruce Luffman
1 year ago

This a good piece by Freddy and I would say two words – cognitive dissonance. It has all the makings of a cult following and that thinking has been enforced by politicians not following science and using behavioural phsychologists to ‘bend’ people’s thinking that it was following science.
One of the reasons that the Governemtn could get away with it is highlighted in one of the comments in that most people did not suffer too much economically from the lockdown. Of course there is a huge cost but that is wrapped up in long term borrowings Secondly, most of the public is ignorant of figures and the appalling statistics and graphs used by the Government and the media went straight over people’s heads. This is clarly an indication of the latest education methods couple with a huge level of apathy in the general public.
The state knows best seems to be the mantra of most citizens and this is further exposed in the misunderstanding of the crazy Net Zero policy which is going to wreck our lives, if implemented, and make the Covid debacle look like a walk in the Park

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago

Thank you.
I disagree, though, with the statement “there was no real data as to whether lockdowns worked”. The WHO’s September 2019 publication “Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza” (ISBN 978-92-4-151683-9) reviewed the evidence and said that the non-pharmaceutical interventions did not work (or only in specific situations/for a very narrow window in time), and were legally and ethically problematical.
Also, all countries have developed protocols for pandemic preparedness, and there are parliamentary committees tasked with implementing them in cooperation with executive offices – these were all shunted aside and pandemic management given to self-appointed “experts” who circumvented all principles of good governance (non-disclosure of conflicts, meetings without minutes, no formal authority or reporting lines).
There were other red-flag “oddities” – prohibiting physicians from treating patients under threat of sanction (never done before); simply ignoring occupational health and safety laws (regarding mask-wearing); ignoring medical licensing principles; etc.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago

Thank you.
I disagree, though, with the statement “there was no real data as to whether lockdowns worked”. The WHO’s September 2019 publication “Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza” (ISBN 978-92-4-151683-9) reviewed the evidence and said that the non-pharmaceutical interventions did not work (or only in specific situations/for a very narrow window in time), and were legally and ethically problematical.
Also, all countries have developed protocols for pandemic preparedness, and there are parliamentary committees tasked with implementing them in cooperation with executive offices – these were all shunted aside and pandemic management given to self-appointed “experts” who circumvented all principles of good governance (non-disclosure of conflicts, meetings without minutes, no formal authority or reporting lines).
There were other red-flag “oddities” – prohibiting physicians from treating patients under threat of sanction (never done before); simply ignoring occupational health and safety laws (regarding mask-wearing); ignoring medical licensing principles; etc.

stephen archer
stephen archer
1 year ago

It’s a bit like Russian society at the moment. Once the population has been brainwashed into believing and accepting something which previously was unthinkable then it’s not so easy to change their perspective. The luxury of having a lot of paid time off work at home was probably also a contributing factor and according to reports there seem to be a lot of the population who are even now averse to returning to work.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  stephen archer

Well yes! If one is doing work that isn’t satisfying and one found a better way to survive, why wouldn’t you opt for that. Many nine to fiver workers have become entrepreneurs. Not averse to work just averse to dead-end jobs.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  stephen archer

Well yes! If one is doing work that isn’t satisfying and one found a better way to survive, why wouldn’t you opt for that. Many nine to fiver workers have become entrepreneurs. Not averse to work just averse to dead-end jobs.

stephen archer
stephen archer
1 year ago

It’s a bit like Russian society at the moment. Once the population has been brainwashed into believing and accepting something which previously was unthinkable then it’s not so easy to change their perspective. The luxury of having a lot of paid time off work at home was probably also a contributing factor and according to reports there seem to be a lot of the population who are even now averse to returning to work.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago

For more or less the same reason that people say, ‘you can’t put a price on a life’ or ‘nurses are angels’, ‘capitalists are evil’ – sappy cop outs, for whom truth and reality are too scary to look at, nuance too confusing. For some reason we produce lots of them in Britain.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

The fact is that most people don’t give a toss about Government, they do as they wish, the ‘abandoned lockdown’ was NOT a Government decision, no matter how much it is claimed, by the Boris knew that a large majority had noted that beachgoers and the BLM hadn’t died off in large numbers. That Prof Doom and his lover were still alive, and so they’d have simply overwhelm any attempt to lock down. Hence my scepticism at the results here. Though it may do as the last Brexit survey did, get Unherd onto the MSM.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

The fact is that most people don’t give a toss about Government, they do as they wish, the ‘abandoned lockdown’ was NOT a Government decision, no matter how much it is claimed, by the Boris knew that a large majority had noted that beachgoers and the BLM hadn’t died off in large numbers. That Prof Doom and his lover were still alive, and so they’d have simply overwhelm any attempt to lock down. Hence my scepticism at the results here. Though it may do as the last Brexit survey did, get Unherd onto the MSM.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago

For more or less the same reason that people say, ‘you can’t put a price on a life’ or ‘nurses are angels’, ‘capitalists are evil’ – sappy cop outs, for whom truth and reality are too scary to look at, nuance too confusing. For some reason we produce lots of them in Britain.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago

Instead of “lockdown skeptic”, count the % of people who are dependent on the govt or work in service jobs and therefore had zero impact of not going to the workplace.

Which also brings into question a. Their lack of intelligence in figuring out that they are ultimately reliant on the economy performing well, small businesses paying tax and b. The utter lack of empathy for others not as fortunate, especially considering that the above group is also typically all about “feelings” and concern.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago

Instead of “lockdown skeptic”, count the % of people who are dependent on the govt or work in service jobs and therefore had zero impact of not going to the workplace.

Which also brings into question a. Their lack of intelligence in figuring out that they are ultimately reliant on the economy performing well, small businesses paying tax and b. The utter lack of empathy for others not as fortunate, especially considering that the above group is also typically all about “feelings” and concern.

Simon S
Simon S
1 year ago

People were scared and brainwashed by the government and the media and the “scientists” behind them, and the WHO. To challenge the official narrative was/is to challenge the institutions we have always more or less trusted. That is/was too bitter a pill for most to swallow.

Most people will always go along with authority- as the Milgram electric shock experiment and, among so many historic instances, the rise of Nazi Germany show. A minority, however, will always hold out – and be ostracised and scapegoated for doing so.

Most people – including my wife unfortunately – allowed themselves to be bamboozled. And most of those people are not going to admit they are wrong.

As Carl Sagan said: “One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken.”

UnHerd has been magnificent covering Covid.

Simon S
Simon S
1 year ago

People were scared and brainwashed by the government and the media and the “scientists” behind them, and the WHO. To challenge the official narrative was/is to challenge the institutions we have always more or less trusted. That is/was too bitter a pill for most to swallow.

Most people will always go along with authority- as the Milgram electric shock experiment and, among so many historic instances, the rise of Nazi Germany show. A minority, however, will always hold out – and be ostracised and scapegoated for doing so.

Most people – including my wife unfortunately – allowed themselves to be bamboozled. And most of those people are not going to admit they are wrong.

As Carl Sagan said: “One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken.”

UnHerd has been magnificent covering Covid.

Sue Ward
Sue Ward
1 year ago

People find it very hard to admit they were wrong.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Sue Ward

Does that include you?

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I suspect she’d have to be wrong to know.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I suspect she’d have to be wrong to know.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Sue Ward

Does that include you?

Sue Ward
Sue Ward
1 year ago

People find it very hard to admit they were wrong.

Graff von Frankenheim
Graff von Frankenheim
1 year ago

Most Western people no longer put a high value on their freedoms. They will gladly flee from autonomy/liberty if they are given an excuse such as medical safety. That this is also the case in countries that were the origin of liberalism such as the UK and the US shouldn’t be surprising as the infantilising effect of the modern nanny/welfare state on the population has undermined the love of liberty and individualism in all countries that adopted these policies after WW2.

Graff von Frankenheim
Graff von Frankenheim
1 year ago

Most Western people no longer put a high value on their freedoms. They will gladly flee from autonomy/liberty if they are given an excuse such as medical safety. That this is also the case in countries that were the origin of liberalism such as the UK and the US shouldn’t be surprising as the infantilising effect of the modern nanny/welfare state on the population has undermined the love of liberty and individualism in all countries that adopted these policies after WW2.

George Venning
George Venning
1 year ago

One of the reasons that you’re not getting the answer you’re looking for is that your question doesn’t state the counterfactual.
I suspect most people would assume that lockdowns stand as a shorthand for covid policy and that, if you don’r support lockdowns then the alternative was to do nothing at all. Few think that would have worked.
Very few would have understood that what you were asking was, “should we have implemented a Swedish-style programme of smaller measures and voluntary behavioural changes of the type that, with the benefit of hindsight, now appear to have been a much better response?”
The hindsight is important – the lethality of the disease wouldn’t have needed to be all that different for Sweden’s outcome to have been awful. Imagine if Covid had been dangerous not only to old people but also to very small children – the way that pneumonia is. You wouldn’t have needed many dead two-year-olds for Sweden’s policy to go into reverse but, by then it might have been too late because of exponential spread.
The second point I’d make is that, of course there isn’t an inverse correllation between strength of lockdown and overall excess death throughout the pandemic. Countries like Britain and the US had strict lockdowns and high excess deaths because a) we implemented our lockdowns late and b) because we sucked at all the things that lockdowns are supposed to buy time for.

George Venning
George Venning
1 year ago

One of the reasons that you’re not getting the answer you’re looking for is that your question doesn’t state the counterfactual.
I suspect most people would assume that lockdowns stand as a shorthand for covid policy and that, if you don’r support lockdowns then the alternative was to do nothing at all. Few think that would have worked.
Very few would have understood that what you were asking was, “should we have implemented a Swedish-style programme of smaller measures and voluntary behavioural changes of the type that, with the benefit of hindsight, now appear to have been a much better response?”
The hindsight is important – the lethality of the disease wouldn’t have needed to be all that different for Sweden’s outcome to have been awful. Imagine if Covid had been dangerous not only to old people but also to very small children – the way that pneumonia is. You wouldn’t have needed many dead two-year-olds for Sweden’s policy to go into reverse but, by then it might have been too late because of exponential spread.
The second point I’d make is that, of course there isn’t an inverse correllation between strength of lockdown and overall excess death throughout the pandemic. Countries like Britain and the US had strict lockdowns and high excess deaths because a) we implemented our lockdowns late and b) because we sucked at all the things that lockdowns are supposed to buy time for.

Dermot O'Sullivan
Dermot O'Sullivan
1 year ago

An interesting article, well constructed, personalised, and … not too long!
Hindsight is a wonderful thing; all the facts are at its disposal, but when living through a crisis then events, influence, and manipulation hold sway.
There appeared to be enough proof (mass graves in Brazil, the army transporting coffins in Italy, Boris Johnson on a ventilator in the UK) that we were up against something very dangerous. Measures had to be taken (on the hoof more often than not) and the nuclear option was rolled out. Sweden, to my surprise, as I have always seen it as a ‘progressive’ paradise, held its nerve, but it was almost alone.

Dermot O'Sullivan
Dermot O'Sullivan
1 year ago

An interesting article, well constructed, personalised, and … not too long!
Hindsight is a wonderful thing; all the facts are at its disposal, but when living through a crisis then events, influence, and manipulation hold sway.
There appeared to be enough proof (mass graves in Brazil, the army transporting coffins in Italy, Boris Johnson on a ventilator in the UK) that we were up against something very dangerous. Measures had to be taken (on the hoof more often than not) and the nuclear option was rolled out. Sweden, to my surprise, as I have always seen it as a ‘progressive’ paradise, held its nerve, but it was almost alone.

Jim Stanton
Jim Stanton
1 year ago

The reason that so many people still think the lockdowns were a good idea is because so many of us are sheep and can’t admit we were duped, which we were.
This was planned to see how much oppression each country would tolerate and to flush out those who wouldn’t conform by the powers that are really in charge.
Covid won’t be the last time this happens. As stated in the article, most people will gladly trade “safety” for freedom. Fear has always been the best way to control a populace and the Covid scare just reenforced that fact.
When I was growing up, people couldn’t understand how so many Germans back before WW2 were convinced to follow Hitler but Covid showed us exactly how that happens. People blindly following whatever mass media and our corrupt leaders told us.
The zealots of the followers then took it upon themselves to “enforce” the lockdowns through intimidation via social media. “You hate old people” or “You want people to die” were two favorites early on here in the States if you weren’t completely on board for the lockdowns.
Does anyone think these zealots are now going to admit their wrong doing and apologize? I seriously doubt it.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Stanton

Not all people are sheep but many are. It’s a personality type that is fear based, seeks security and tends to be paranoid (conspiracy therorists) If anyone would like to know more about this personality type you might check out ‘The Enneagram’ for type six. It’s fascinating stuff. We’re all one of nine personality types and you can self-identify.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Sounds like Gender then 😉

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Sounds like Gender then 😉

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Stanton

Not all people are sheep but many are. It’s a personality type that is fear based, seeks security and tends to be paranoid (conspiracy therorists) If anyone would like to know more about this personality type you might check out ‘The Enneagram’ for type six. It’s fascinating stuff. We’re all one of nine personality types and you can self-identify.

Jim Stanton
Jim Stanton
1 year ago

The reason that so many people still think the lockdowns were a good idea is because so many of us are sheep and can’t admit we were duped, which we were.
This was planned to see how much oppression each country would tolerate and to flush out those who wouldn’t conform by the powers that are really in charge.
Covid won’t be the last time this happens. As stated in the article, most people will gladly trade “safety” for freedom. Fear has always been the best way to control a populace and the Covid scare just reenforced that fact.
When I was growing up, people couldn’t understand how so many Germans back before WW2 were convinced to follow Hitler but Covid showed us exactly how that happens. People blindly following whatever mass media and our corrupt leaders told us.
The zealots of the followers then took it upon themselves to “enforce” the lockdowns through intimidation via social media. “You hate old people” or “You want people to die” were two favorites early on here in the States if you weren’t completely on board for the lockdowns.
Does anyone think these zealots are now going to admit their wrong doing and apologize? I seriously doubt it.

Sean Booth
Sean Booth
1 year ago

Well the results of this particular poll do indicate what I already new. That the majority of the population are too lazy, too stupid or too disinterested to do any research on any subject outside of what the mainstream media churns out. That is why lockdowns were so popular in the first place and is also why people who supported them then, still support them now. I despair at the ease with which the establishment can coerce compliance with lies, untruths and propaganda.

Sean Booth
Sean Booth
1 year ago

Well the results of this particular poll do indicate what I already new. That the majority of the population are too lazy, too stupid or too disinterested to do any research on any subject outside of what the mainstream media churns out. That is why lockdowns were so popular in the first place and is also why people who supported them then, still support them now. I despair at the ease with which the establishment can coerce compliance with lies, untruths and propaganda.

Mike MacCormack
Mike MacCormack
1 year ago

the evidence from a ‘meta-analysis’ of the impact of wearing facemasks is now available too; no discernible difference. check out dr john campbell on you tube, he spends half an hour apologising for being so wrong.

Mike MacCormack
Mike MacCormack
1 year ago

the evidence from a ‘meta-analysis’ of the impact of wearing facemasks is now available too; no discernible difference. check out dr john campbell on you tube, he spends half an hour apologising for being so wrong.

SIMON WOLF
SIMON WOLF
1 year ago

Freddie misses out that a lot of people benefited from the Furlough scheme.An acquantance of mine regards it as financialy the best time of her life and she is in her 50’s – she was getting paid for a job without having to clock in anymore to the textile factory she worked in and was able to earn a second income from repairing peoples clothes

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  SIMON WOLF

Indeed. Amazon Prime delivered everything, streaming provided entertainment, every hobby and whim could be indulged, gas was cheap, roads were empty and the exclusive zones free from lower class interlopers, except those kept masked, doused in sanitizer, required to take off their shoes on entering and able to show papers. . . Nobody from the “outside” around to see the partying going on, people celebrating their good fortune with “work from home” arrangements and second income opportunities. . .

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  SIMON WOLF

Indeed. Amazon Prime delivered everything, streaming provided entertainment, every hobby and whim could be indulged, gas was cheap, roads were empty and the exclusive zones free from lower class interlopers, except those kept masked, doused in sanitizer, required to take off their shoes on entering and able to show papers. . . Nobody from the “outside” around to see the partying going on, people celebrating their good fortune with “work from home” arrangements and second income opportunities. . .

SIMON WOLF
SIMON WOLF
1 year ago

Freddie misses out that a lot of people benefited from the Furlough scheme.An acquantance of mine regards it as financialy the best time of her life and she is in her 50’s – she was getting paid for a job without having to clock in anymore to the textile factory she worked in and was able to earn a second income from repairing peoples clothes

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago

A couple of things, Freddy. First, the purpose of lockdown, initially, was not to save lives it was to prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed. Remember squashing the sombrero? There was a recognition that a similar number of deaths would occur but over a longer period. Obviously, if the NHS did become overwhelmed, more would die but the saving of lives was a second order effect.
Second, excess deaths doesn’t tell us much about the effectiveness of a country’s Covid response. It’s more a measure of the health of the population at the start of the pandemic. As we all know – obesity, diabetes, heart disease etc – Britain was and is a pretty unhealthy place.

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago

A couple of things, Freddy. First, the purpose of lockdown, initially, was not to save lives it was to prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed. Remember squashing the sombrero? There was a recognition that a similar number of deaths would occur but over a longer period. Obviously, if the NHS did become overwhelmed, more would die but the saving of lives was a second order effect.
Second, excess deaths doesn’t tell us much about the effectiveness of a country’s Covid response. It’s more a measure of the health of the population at the start of the pandemic. As we all know – obesity, diabetes, heart disease etc – Britain was and is a pretty unhealthy place.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Well said Mr Sayers!

“Utinam populus Romanus unam cervicem haberet”* as Caligula said!

(* Would that the Roman people had but one neck: Suetonius, The twelve Caesars.)

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Oh stop showing off, Charles.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Oh stop showing off, Charles.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Well said Mr Sayers!

“Utinam populus Romanus unam cervicem haberet”* as Caligula said!

(* Would that the Roman people had but one neck: Suetonius, The twelve Caesars.)

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago

“I hope there is no “next time”,…….”
But it is already here. Have you not heard of global warning, sorry climate change, sorry climate emergency, sorry climate catastrophe, sorry climate Armageddon
And oh look the culprits are exactly the same

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago

You are absolutely right. Made a comment about that. We will be locked down and/or forced to cut down on our energy use. We will be forced to eat bugs and crawl back into our caves..

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago

You are absolutely right. Made a comment about that. We will be locked down and/or forced to cut down on our energy use. We will be forced to eat bugs and crawl back into our caves..

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago

“I hope there is no “next time”,…….”
But it is already here. Have you not heard of global warning, sorry climate change, sorry climate emergency, sorry climate catastrophe, sorry climate Armageddon
And oh look the culprits are exactly the same

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago

I have a simple but effective rule: if dishonest people in untrustworthy institutions – government, media, academia, entertainment – are all hysterical about an issue – Covid, Trump, Ukraine, Race, Trans – do not believe them. They are lying. For money.
When I first heard the Covid drumbeat in March 2020, I was skeptical. By April, I knew it was a tool to measure compliance. I never complied, and I’m very glad to have ignored the mask rules, stay-home edicts, Get the shot! demands, even pressure from family members. I haven’t had the virus and I’m in my 60s. Every single person I know who has taken the shot has had it, most more than once. The young people in my orbit have been getting sick with one thing or other every couple of months. I haven’t had a cold since 2015.
The whole thing is so sinister it feels like science fiction. And yet, according to this poll, there are still zombies denying their brains are missing.

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago

Same here (exactly) but I am a slim fit 80yr old. So many people are obese with low immune systems.

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago

Same here (exactly) but I am a slim fit 80yr old. So many people are obese with low immune systems.

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago

I have a simple but effective rule: if dishonest people in untrustworthy institutions – government, media, academia, entertainment – are all hysterical about an issue – Covid, Trump, Ukraine, Race, Trans – do not believe them. They are lying. For money.
When I first heard the Covid drumbeat in March 2020, I was skeptical. By April, I knew it was a tool to measure compliance. I never complied, and I’m very glad to have ignored the mask rules, stay-home edicts, Get the shot! demands, even pressure from family members. I haven’t had the virus and I’m in my 60s. Every single person I know who has taken the shot has had it, most more than once. The young people in my orbit have been getting sick with one thing or other every couple of months. I haven’t had a cold since 2015.
The whole thing is so sinister it feels like science fiction. And yet, according to this poll, there are still zombies denying their brains are missing.

Nic Cowper
Nic Cowper
1 year ago

I share your feelings Freddie. To me the last three years has taken me from insider to outsider, losing my faith in humanity including friends, institutions and government. Gosh to think I was once convinced the government worked for me! But there are positives: I now have UnHerd, Neil Oliver, Russell Brand, Dr Campbell, Maajid Nawaz and now Andrew Bridgen. Now, I SEE integrity where it is, and more importantly, where it is not. My new cohort and I will be ready for the next one….

Nic Cowper
Nic Cowper
1 year ago

I share your feelings Freddie. To me the last three years has taken me from insider to outsider, losing my faith in humanity including friends, institutions and government. Gosh to think I was once convinced the government worked for me! But there are positives: I now have UnHerd, Neil Oliver, Russell Brand, Dr Campbell, Maajid Nawaz and now Andrew Bridgen. Now, I SEE integrity where it is, and more importantly, where it is not. My new cohort and I will be ready for the next one….

James Kay
James Kay
1 year ago

There are so many factors at play and so many differences between countries that it will be impossible to identify what really happened and obviously even more so what could have happened. The people who made the decisions at the time will forever be able to hide behind that because there is no definitive proof of anything.
One thing’s for sure, next time the same will happen because no one can say for sure it was wrong and the supposed benefits are immediate while the costs and the damage play out slowly over the longer term – someone else’s problem.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  James Kay

It won’t happen a second time.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  James Kay

It won’t happen a second time.

James Kay
James Kay
1 year ago

There are so many factors at play and so many differences between countries that it will be impossible to identify what really happened and obviously even more so what could have happened. The people who made the decisions at the time will forever be able to hide behind that because there is no definitive proof of anything.
One thing’s for sure, next time the same will happen because no one can say for sure it was wrong and the supposed benefits are immediate while the costs and the damage play out slowly over the longer term – someone else’s problem.

David Barnett
David Barnett
1 year ago

It is far harder to persuade someone they have been duped than to dupe them in the first place.
The older voter was brought up to believe in the infallibility of trained “experts”. Yet the ‘establishment” is revealed to be terminally infested by people who are, at best, power-intoxicated incompetents without the wit (and/or too prideful) to correct course. To acknowledge what has been revealed means overturning a world view that has been internalised and incorporated into one’s very being. It is like overturning one’s very self – terrifying.
I would say that the older voters who cling to the “lockdowns saved lives” narrative, are even more terrified of losing their world view than of death itself.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  David Barnett

I am not convinced by your older voter argument.
In my, now much diminished, circle of friends it was quite opposite.
3 of us in mid 60s were quite sceptical and carried on as before by meeting up and travelling abroad when possible.
It was younger cohort (50s and late 40s) who were in full Taliban mode.
It was not always related to politics.
I was for Brexit and the other two of my friends were Remainers (one soft, another Dominic Grieve fanatic).

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  David Barnett

I am not convinced by your older voter argument.
In my, now much diminished, circle of friends it was quite opposite.
3 of us in mid 60s were quite sceptical and carried on as before by meeting up and travelling abroad when possible.
It was younger cohort (50s and late 40s) who were in full Taliban mode.
It was not always related to politics.
I was for Brexit and the other two of my friends were Remainers (one soft, another Dominic Grieve fanatic).

David Barnett
David Barnett
1 year ago

It is far harder to persuade someone they have been duped than to dupe them in the first place.
The older voter was brought up to believe in the infallibility of trained “experts”. Yet the ‘establishment” is revealed to be terminally infested by people who are, at best, power-intoxicated incompetents without the wit (and/or too prideful) to correct course. To acknowledge what has been revealed means overturning a world view that has been internalised and incorporated into one’s very being. It is like overturning one’s very self – terrifying.
I would say that the older voters who cling to the “lockdowns saved lives” narrative, are even more terrified of losing their world view than of death itself.

Helen Nevitt
Helen Nevitt
1 year ago

I have read this and I am seething with rage. I agree with every word. How often does that happen?

Last edited 1 year ago by Helen Nevitt
Helen Nevitt
Helen Nevitt
1 year ago

I have read this and I am seething with rage. I agree with every word. How often does that happen?

Last edited 1 year ago by Helen Nevitt
Kelly Madden
Kelly Madden
1 year ago

“[M]ost people haven’t seen the evidence. Nor will they.”
And if they do, it will not be stated (and restated and restated…) as clearly as the lies were.

Kelly Madden
Kelly Madden
1 year ago

“[M]ost people haven’t seen the evidence. Nor will they.”
And if they do, it will not be stated (and restated and restated…) as clearly as the lies were.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Censorship experiment.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
dave dobbin
dave dobbin
1 year ago

Try that in Latin

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  dave dobbin

I did and it got censored!

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago

Eheu, damnatio memoriae!

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago

Eheu, damnatio memoriae!

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  dave dobbin

I did and it got censored!

dave dobbin
dave dobbin
1 year ago

Try that in Latin

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Censorship experiment.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

As above.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

As above.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago

People were suddenly presented with a media and government information assault on a previously unknown level. They were presented with a problem they could not assess from experience, while everyone they trusted (and most people STILL trust the MSM and government) were howling that the Four Horsemen were riding out.

It was sudden, it was coordinated and it was relentless. I was a night shift supervisor on a construction site in those early weeks, and it was quickly obvious how the problem was structured so as to prevent any useful conclusion – every question led to another, there were so many questions that had no obvious answer.

Construction workers are not, generally speaking, of a nervous disposition but they live in a world of uncertainty, rumour, sudden change, real risk of injury or illness and at times, deliberate disinformation. They are a good exemplar for large sections of our society; independent minded but helplessly addicted to the mass media, acute about some things but easily stampeded in some ways.

They swallowed it whole, not least because of the immediate and obvious problems it brought by disrupting the supply chain – especially bulk perishables like fuel and cement. If your work is disrupted because you have no cement, “because covid”; why, this covid must be a serious matter! Mustn’t it? Actually, no, because that is reasoning from conclusions; but it’s astonishing how many people aren’t mentally equipped to understand this sort of logical fallacy.

One crucial problem is that a large majority of people are not able to envisage the mental landscape inhabited by the radical Left. In this incomprehensible world, where logic is infinitely malleable and today’s truth are discarded tomorrow, where things incapable of demonstration are blindly believed, covid was just “business as usual”

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago

People were suddenly presented with a media and government information assault on a previously unknown level. They were presented with a problem they could not assess from experience, while everyone they trusted (and most people STILL trust the MSM and government) were howling that the Four Horsemen were riding out.

It was sudden, it was coordinated and it was relentless. I was a night shift supervisor on a construction site in those early weeks, and it was quickly obvious how the problem was structured so as to prevent any useful conclusion – every question led to another, there were so many questions that had no obvious answer.

Construction workers are not, generally speaking, of a nervous disposition but they live in a world of uncertainty, rumour, sudden change, real risk of injury or illness and at times, deliberate disinformation. They are a good exemplar for large sections of our society; independent minded but helplessly addicted to the mass media, acute about some things but easily stampeded in some ways.

They swallowed it whole, not least because of the immediate and obvious problems it brought by disrupting the supply chain – especially bulk perishables like fuel and cement. If your work is disrupted because you have no cement, “because covid”; why, this covid must be a serious matter! Mustn’t it? Actually, no, because that is reasoning from conclusions; but it’s astonishing how many people aren’t mentally equipped to understand this sort of logical fallacy.

One crucial problem is that a large majority of people are not able to envisage the mental landscape inhabited by the radical Left. In this incomprehensible world, where logic is infinitely malleable and today’s truth are discarded tomorrow, where things incapable of demonstration are blindly believed, covid was just “business as usual”

Slopmop McTeash
Slopmop McTeash
1 year ago

Someone smart once wrote something along the lines of: it is easy to fool a person, what is almost impossible is to then convince them that they have been fooled.
It seems as if once a human has made a decision in a state of panic, so emotionally attached to that decision does that person become that no amount of evidence will ever convince them to change their minds.
The media and the government were responsible for wave after wave of vile disinformation and misinformation that brainwashed the weak into becoming obedient zombies.

Last edited 1 year ago by Slopmop McTeash
Slopmop McTeash
Slopmop McTeash
1 year ago

Someone smart once wrote something along the lines of: it is easy to fool a person, what is almost impossible is to then convince them that they have been fooled.
It seems as if once a human has made a decision in a state of panic, so emotionally attached to that decision does that person become that no amount of evidence will ever convince them to change their minds.
The media and the government were responsible for wave after wave of vile disinformation and misinformation that brainwashed the weak into becoming obedient zombies.

Last edited 1 year ago by Slopmop McTeash
Charles Jenkin
Charles Jenkin
1 year ago

This article doesn’t address the issue of stopping the pandemic overwhelming the NHS. As I remember it, it was this fear that predominated, and that an overwhelmed NHS would result in a lot more deaths that were not directly from Covid, quite apart from agonisingly having to triage Covid cases as to who got treatment. The UK (still) has a health service with very little margin for significantly increased demand. Perhaps it is the state of the UK’s health service that really drove the lockdowns.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Jenkin

I remember the NHS being overwhelmed 25 years ago and I’m not even a British. People dying in corridors in the hospitals.

Ben Scanlon
Ben Scanlon
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Jenkin

True. All the time in the daily briefings, they emphasised that it was about protecting the NHS so it could cope. Surprised the writer missed that.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Ben Scanlon

But NHS did sweet F**k all.
Otherwise, how do you explain current ever longer queues for basic medical procedures….

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Ben Scanlon

But NHS did sweet F**k all.
Otherwise, how do you explain current ever longer queues for basic medical procedures….

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Jenkin

I remember the NHS being overwhelmed 25 years ago and I’m not even a British. People dying in corridors in the hospitals.

Ben Scanlon
Ben Scanlon
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Jenkin

True. All the time in the daily briefings, they emphasised that it was about protecting the NHS so it could cope. Surprised the writer missed that.

Charles Jenkin
Charles Jenkin
1 year ago

This article doesn’t address the issue of stopping the pandemic overwhelming the NHS. As I remember it, it was this fear that predominated, and that an overwhelmed NHS would result in a lot more deaths that were not directly from Covid, quite apart from agonisingly having to triage Covid cases as to who got treatment. The UK (still) has a health service with very little margin for significantly increased demand. Perhaps it is the state of the UK’s health service that really drove the lockdowns.

jim peden
jim peden
1 year ago

This is indeed a bitter pill for those of us who found ourselves horrified and baffled by the mass psychosis that afflicted others.
You point out that “The dissident class skews young” and that’s what should give us hope for the future.
Past events show that we should expect more of the same until the truth about what happened penetrates. I’m indebted to you and others like you for continuing to push this. I have to believe that we can avoid another thousand years of darkness.

jim peden
jim peden
1 year ago

This is indeed a bitter pill for those of us who found ourselves horrified and baffled by the mass psychosis that afflicted others.
You point out that “The dissident class skews young” and that’s what should give us hope for the future.
Past events show that we should expect more of the same until the truth about what happened penetrates. I’m indebted to you and others like you for continuing to push this. I have to believe that we can avoid another thousand years of darkness.

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
1 year ago

With the many people I have raised this with, most felt that the first UK lockdown was justified because of the unknown, and the fact that the other things government had tried didn’t seem to have been very effective, because of shortages and also, we didn’t have a very competent government at the time.
Part of my view in retrospect, is based on later reading the chronicling of decision-making by one D. Cummings, who was of course, part of that dysfunction. None of that would have been a surprise to anyone.
The following is just musings on my experience leading up to that first lockdown.
I was in the interesting position of having travelled to China in late December 2019 or maybe it was first few days of 2020. Gave me an unusual perspective.
I got to see how a lockdown worked in a huge and in parts, very new city, with a fresh, sparkling metro system, a newly minted CBD, where everyone wore masks, socially distanced, and you needed a fresh health code on your phone to enter any building.
Once I found the gate at the back of the garden in the quarantine hotel, I started roaming far and wide across the city. No-one stopped me. I was the only Westerner in a city of 8 millions, just about. Doubt the police knew what to make of me. Maybe they thought I was a journalist?
In a surreal ‘Last Emperor’ moment, I walked down a huge set of stairs in front of a government building, onto a square, where two ranks of sanitation police, lined up for inspection, stood to attention either side of an archway, Walked between them, out the archway, and off on my way. Total silence.
I felt safe. For whatever it was worth, it seemed The Party was up to the great battle of humanity. We had to knuckle down and comply, do our duty, keep cool and keep smiling. I’m no communist, but in that time, it was hard not to be impressed.
When booted out of China in late March [foreigners without a longterm visa couldn’t enter housing estates according to their law, so renting a flat wasn’t possible] I just wasn’t scared anymore. The city I was in, only had three deaths. I’d been to the heart of it, walked around a whole city (10+ miles a day) even down the very street where the lateral-flow tests we would use for the next two years are made.
I had never felt more adrenalin-pumped and healthy in my life.
Saw the chaos on arrival at Heathrow and knew change was coming. No-one was distancing. Got told off for wearing a mask by a grumpy squaddie as ‘you’re gonna alarm people’.
No one at the imigresen desk asked me where I’d been in China.
I’d brought back covid medication for a medicine lady I know – a box of dried slugs. She’d found a similar disease in the traditional Chinese medicine chronicles, from 1200 years ago. The slugs were to be ground into a potion to make patients cough all the sputum up, so it never got to settle on the lungs. No one asked to look at my box.
I knew many British people were extremely unhealthy. I’d been a masseur, visiting many, many, sick and immuno-compromised people a few years prior, and seen the cramped conditions where they lived, where no social distancing worth a pinch of shit was ever going to be possible. Working in nursing, I’d seen dozens of decrepit hospitals. Surely, a lot of people were going to die.
The science, on masks or whatever, was all over the shop. People were scared. A mate was walking round Chinatown with vinegar up his nostrils. A remedy from the Black Death. It was impossible that the government was going to do nothing.
Doubt they had the levers or the skills to do anything nuanced. The district nurse/health visitor system was a shambles. My London borough hardly manages at the best of times.
So after ten days isolating, I walked around for an uneasy three days. Then when word got about, that there was going to be a big announcement at 6pm, I went to a bar and got a couple of whiskies.
And waited.

Last edited 1 year ago by Dumetrius
Dumetrius
Dumetrius
1 year ago

With the many people I have raised this with, most felt that the first UK lockdown was justified because of the unknown, and the fact that the other things government had tried didn’t seem to have been very effective, because of shortages and also, we didn’t have a very competent government at the time.
Part of my view in retrospect, is based on later reading the chronicling of decision-making by one D. Cummings, who was of course, part of that dysfunction. None of that would have been a surprise to anyone.
The following is just musings on my experience leading up to that first lockdown.
I was in the interesting position of having travelled to China in late December 2019 or maybe it was first few days of 2020. Gave me an unusual perspective.
I got to see how a lockdown worked in a huge and in parts, very new city, with a fresh, sparkling metro system, a newly minted CBD, where everyone wore masks, socially distanced, and you needed a fresh health code on your phone to enter any building.
Once I found the gate at the back of the garden in the quarantine hotel, I started roaming far and wide across the city. No-one stopped me. I was the only Westerner in a city of 8 millions, just about. Doubt the police knew what to make of me. Maybe they thought I was a journalist?
In a surreal ‘Last Emperor’ moment, I walked down a huge set of stairs in front of a government building, onto a square, where two ranks of sanitation police, lined up for inspection, stood to attention either side of an archway, Walked between them, out the archway, and off on my way. Total silence.
I felt safe. For whatever it was worth, it seemed The Party was up to the great battle of humanity. We had to knuckle down and comply, do our duty, keep cool and keep smiling. I’m no communist, but in that time, it was hard not to be impressed.
When booted out of China in late March [foreigners without a longterm visa couldn’t enter housing estates according to their law, so renting a flat wasn’t possible] I just wasn’t scared anymore. The city I was in, only had three deaths. I’d been to the heart of it, walked around a whole city (10+ miles a day) even down the very street where the lateral-flow tests we would use for the next two years are made.
I had never felt more adrenalin-pumped and healthy in my life.
Saw the chaos on arrival at Heathrow and knew change was coming. No-one was distancing. Got told off for wearing a mask by a grumpy squaddie as ‘you’re gonna alarm people’.
No one at the imigresen desk asked me where I’d been in China.
I’d brought back covid medication for a medicine lady I know – a box of dried slugs. She’d found a similar disease in the traditional Chinese medicine chronicles, from 1200 years ago. The slugs were to be ground into a potion to make patients cough all the sputum up, so it never got to settle on the lungs. No one asked to look at my box.
I knew many British people were extremely unhealthy. I’d been a masseur, visiting many, many, sick and immuno-compromised people a few years prior, and seen the cramped conditions where they lived, where no social distancing worth a pinch of shit was ever going to be possible. Working in nursing, I’d seen dozens of decrepit hospitals. Surely, a lot of people were going to die.
The science, on masks or whatever, was all over the shop. People were scared. A mate was walking round Chinatown with vinegar up his nostrils. A remedy from the Black Death. It was impossible that the government was going to do nothing.
Doubt they had the levers or the skills to do anything nuanced. The district nurse/health visitor system was a shambles. My London borough hardly manages at the best of times.
So after ten days isolating, I walked around for an uneasy three days. Then when word got about, that there was going to be a big announcement at 6pm, I went to a bar and got a couple of whiskies.
And waited.

Last edited 1 year ago by Dumetrius
Brendan O'Leary
Brendan O'Leary
1 year ago

Although I took a 20% pay cut at the start, it was eventually restored, and I did not suffer financially during lockdown. Still, I hated every minute of it.

My wife was diagnosed with cancer right at the start..I can’t say she didn’t receive treatment in time. If anything, lockdown cleared the decks for more serious cases such as hers. Some of the time (only some) we would have been isolating (aka “shielding”) anyway, but the isolation and stress destroyed any quality of her last moments of mobility and then, of life.

It’s too distressing to go into more detail.

Last edited 1 year ago by Brendan O'Leary
Brendan O'Leary
Brendan O'Leary
1 year ago

Although I took a 20% pay cut at the start, it was eventually restored, and I did not suffer financially during lockdown. Still, I hated every minute of it.

My wife was diagnosed with cancer right at the start..I can’t say she didn’t receive treatment in time. If anything, lockdown cleared the decks for more serious cases such as hers. Some of the time (only some) we would have been isolating (aka “shielding”) anyway, but the isolation and stress destroyed any quality of her last moments of mobility and then, of life.

It’s too distressing to go into more detail.

Last edited 1 year ago by Brendan O'Leary
Benjamin Jones
Benjamin Jones
1 year ago

I’ll say it here, I absolutely loved lockdown. No pressure to go out on overcrowded roads, the weather was absolutely fantastic, the quietness was something I never thought I would experience again, it was like the Sundays of my youth. I loved the strangeness of it all, being at home every day and knowing that financially we were going to be ok. But, did I agree with lockdown? No I didn’t, it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that the repercussions of the rules (which didn’t make logical sense) would be far reaching for society and for the economy. Watching the MSM made me feel like I was going crazy so thank the lord for the questioning attitude of Talk Radio whom, leaked text by text, are proving to have been right.

Benjamin Jones
Benjamin Jones
1 year ago

I’ll say it here, I absolutely loved lockdown. No pressure to go out on overcrowded roads, the weather was absolutely fantastic, the quietness was something I never thought I would experience again, it was like the Sundays of my youth. I loved the strangeness of it all, being at home every day and knowing that financially we were going to be ok. But, did I agree with lockdown? No I didn’t, it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that the repercussions of the rules (which didn’t make logical sense) would be far reaching for society and for the economy. Watching the MSM made me feel like I was going crazy so thank the lord for the questioning attitude of Talk Radio whom, leaked text by text, are proving to have been right.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

Come one Freddie that was a bit ‘woe is me’. You almost sound like a Brexit Remainer struggling to understand that bit of hari-kuri and the irony was not lost on some of us I’m sure.
The analysis of Covid policies has not finished in many countries and in some it hasn’t yet started – e.g UK. The really useful analysis of comparable Lockdown impacts will percolate into these and into future Policy. And concur with some other comments that Unherd pushing these different assessments is of significant social value. The percolation just takes a while.
The role of ‘fear’ in driving Policy compliance also needs serious Public Inquiry reflection. But it’s a broader issue as we know with many elements on the political spectrum using unfounded fear when it suits. Let’s not cherry pick the occasions when we call that out.
However would add I think a failure to distinguish between the initial Lockdowns and then those that followed in winter 2020-21 is not helping and too simplistic. We all had much less appreciation of the Virus during March 20 and much less ordnance with which to fight.
I also think Unherd has lacked Articles illuminating what it was like at the coalface in hospitals those first few weeks when we were overwhelmed and frightened. Transmission rate had to slow and the tools to do that at this stage were v limited and inevitably crude. We could have been much better prepared and more analysis of why we weren’t needs to also be illuminated.

Michelle Johnston
Michelle Johnston
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

It was already established when the Virus was acknowledged in the financial times on 20th January 2020 that three groups were vulnerable.
1) The elderly.
2) Comorbid.
3) Overworked medical staff not properly protected.
All the focus should have been on developing further health protocols for the first two groups and making them aware they were high-risk. In addition, the low-paid multi jobing care home workers should have been given rigorous training and education. In Melbourne Australia, that group spread the Virus even whilst lockdowns were in place. It was a 90/10 problem always was.
As I said that group remains in large numbers hidden away.
Europe also very quickly recognized for the fit working population it was unpleasant but not dangerous.
I appreciate I have a degree-level qualification in quantitive statistics and understand numbers in a way others do not but death rates peaked within one cycle of transmission (14 days) after lockdowns were instituted. In New Zealand which was locked down on the same day as the UK, they plateaued on the day of lockdown and fell back. This outcome happened all over Europe death rates peaked before the theoretical benefits of slowing transmission emerged from lockdown, the converse of Melbourne where the death rate increased for 56 days from the day of the most stringent lockdown simply because the multi-tasking low-paid care workers continued to go to work with the virus. That is the one group that should have been tested and every day before entering the building. ACTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN TARGETED.
It is a fallacy to say we did not know, no one was listening in the Great Panic.
Between March 2020 and March 2023 1.795 million people died in England and Wales. Less than 200,000 ” Involved” Covid. That is three years in which flu deaths would typically be 70,000. That is just short of the 3-1 that Johann Gieseke predicted ….. without intervention. No lives were saved here, no lives have been saved in New Zealand it’s hubris to think you can stop the elderly comorbid dying when a new respiratory illness comes along.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

I think you put too much stock in how you saw aggregated numbers and not the reality on the ground in health services. Services were overwhelmed and even if Govt has grasped the mettle sooner than they did it’s not clear the measures you suggest (albeit a bit vague still) could have been introduced quickly enough. Targeting seems a simple solution until you actually get into the mechanics of how that would work quickly.
Some coalface figures from my own experience – my local hospital had 4 patients admitted with Covid diagnosis on 28th Feb 2020. It had 542 by 10th April, 30% of staff off sick, and another c25% we had to place in a lower risk environment. (Ref: Hospital had c700 beds in total). The ability to deliver other hospital care was massively compromised.
Whether the Lockdown initiated in late March helped stem the transmission and hospitalisation rate, or whether that would have happened anyway I’m v keen the Public Inquiry investigates. But at the time it’s entirely understandable we locked down, and if anything a bit too late. Subsequent winter 20/21 Lockdowns much more debatable IMO

Michelle Johnston
Michelle Johnston
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Thanks for your reply.
You unknowingly lay bare the core issue. NHS workers, who are supposed to have the highest standard of preventive hygiene for spreading germs, were as a group completely unable to do so. What chance has the co-morbid elderly got? 25% of people who entered the hospital without the virus ended up contracting it inside the hospital.
The only solutions were brutal targetted ones not untargeted ones.
From May 2020 the excess death rates at home were 800 a week (ONS stats on the place of death) and only 2% of those people died of Sars Cov 2. 40,000 excess deaths at home in the first year. That’s what you get when not brutally ring-fencing a health service so it can continue to function.
In New Zealand, 30,000 operations were canceled during the 2020 six-week lockdown and there were only a handful of cases incredulously SPREAD around all the hospitals on both Islands.
The only realistic way to deal with this in the UK and NZ was to create fever hospitals for the crucial six weeks of the expansion. Analysis as early as June 2020 indicated that isolation management even within hospitals was naive.
Isolate, isolate use out of the way military hospitals but do not let Covid patients into a regular setting. Did the UK not build the surge capacity and did not a million people volunteer to help?
If you want to slow the rate of attrition it happens at the coal face. But then you need competent well run integrated services. My experience of the NHS across two deaths and two hospitals is they are completely disorganized and far too many of the staff are themselves co-morbid,
In Sweden, they gave those who were going to die Morphine to keep them out of hospitals and focused on keeping their health service functioning the net effect was to save lives and reduce the chances of excess mortality overall. Tough but right!
The NHS, however, is only a part of the problem it is tasked with keeping a Tsumani of elderly people alive way beyond any period of grace and dignity rather than making hard choices so they are free to do constructive life-saving work. It is constantly overwhelmed by the elderly and the real message of the Great Panic is not to panic when people right at the end of their lives are faced with a virus to which they have no immunity.
20,000 nursing home residents died of the Virus in 2020 which was out of a total of 170,000 deaths. Old people die!
However, this misses the core of the fallacy of Lockdown. The rest of the fit healthy and active population was never at risk from this new virus. Millions upon millions of people have had the virus and I am talking about pre-vaccination, felt rough for two days and got over it, that is the group that should have been allowed to get on with their lives and simply be very cautious around their elderly relatives. We all know that works because by the summer of 2020, the handful of hotspots left was amongst the communities which lived multi-generational and have low levels of compliance. But again the tail was allowed to wag the dog. My daughter actually lives in the epicenter of the Virus in the UK, Bolton, and even there it was down to certain wards having the virus, not the entire town let alone Greater Manchester. Go in and educate those wards!!
Lockdowns were not tough they were a lazy answer. The tough brave policy was to funnel the elderly which ironically is what China did and it worked during the first crucial weeks. They got their medical response right they just made a much bigger error with society as a whole. And as an aside where are the mass deaths which were forecast when the Chinese let it rip a few weeks ago? Even at the end of this debacle, the Western Press continues to scare monger.
I will finish with a personal reflection. Last summer I went to the Island of Lombok and amongst other things climbed Mount Rinjani from one of the local villages. My guides were local. I asked them about their experiences.
The reply was if we had not had news of it on the TV we would have had no idea it existed maybe some people got it but it was just another minor ailment. Meanwhile, they went fishing every day while the Island was Empty of tourists and the government closed them down. There wasn’t a mask to be had. That really put it in perspective for me.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

Certainly something in the notion we needed to establish ‘fever hospitals’ v quickly and isolate. But I think you underestimate the complexity and time needed to do that and a little bit too much hindsight in the perspective. Patients were coming via EDs and ambulances services and the ability to isolate those quickly was v limited. PPE supply was woeful. ITUs and Wards are not all single rooms. And staff stretch meant setting up separate ‘fever’ areas compromised. (You may have seen all the Nightingale separate Units set up in the UK only to remain unused due to lack of staff). Furthermore it’s a mistake to assume in the early days it was just elderly hitting us. It wasn’t. (Our PM a case in point).
However does not mean that aren’t lessons and esp for the subsequent Lockdown in winter 20-21, or for how we should have been better prepared as a Nation. But operationally with the speed with which it hit us I think you are assuming things could be done quickly which essentially couldn’t.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

“Life is a terminal disease”- Andy Warhol… We are all going to end up in the plywood monocoque in the bone garden one day, so why worry.. ?

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

Certainly something in the notion we needed to establish ‘fever hospitals’ v quickly and isolate. But I think you underestimate the complexity and time needed to do that and a little bit too much hindsight in the perspective. Patients were coming via EDs and ambulances services and the ability to isolate those quickly was v limited. PPE supply was woeful. ITUs and Wards are not all single rooms. And staff stretch meant setting up separate ‘fever’ areas compromised. (You may have seen all the Nightingale separate Units set up in the UK only to remain unused due to lack of staff). Furthermore it’s a mistake to assume in the early days it was just elderly hitting us. It wasn’t. (Our PM a case in point).
However does not mean that aren’t lessons and esp for the subsequent Lockdown in winter 20-21, or for how we should have been better prepared as a Nation. But operationally with the speed with which it hit us I think you are assuming things could be done quickly which essentially couldn’t.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

“Life is a terminal disease”- Andy Warhol… We are all going to end up in the plywood monocoque in the bone garden one day, so why worry.. ?

Michelle Johnston
Michelle Johnston
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Thanks for your reply.
You unknowingly lay bare the core issue. NHS workers, who are supposed to have the highest standard of preventive hygiene for spreading germs, were as a group completely unable to do so. What chance has the co-morbid elderly got? 25% of people who entered the hospital without the virus ended up contracting it inside the hospital.
The only solutions were brutal targetted ones not untargeted ones.
From May 2020 the excess death rates at home were 800 a week (ONS stats on the place of death) and only 2% of those people died of Sars Cov 2. 40,000 excess deaths at home in the first year. That’s what you get when not brutally ring-fencing a health service so it can continue to function.
In New Zealand, 30,000 operations were canceled during the 2020 six-week lockdown and there were only a handful of cases incredulously SPREAD around all the hospitals on both Islands.
The only realistic way to deal with this in the UK and NZ was to create fever hospitals for the crucial six weeks of the expansion. Analysis as early as June 2020 indicated that isolation management even within hospitals was naive.
Isolate, isolate use out of the way military hospitals but do not let Covid patients into a regular setting. Did the UK not build the surge capacity and did not a million people volunteer to help?
If you want to slow the rate of attrition it happens at the coal face. But then you need competent well run integrated services. My experience of the NHS across two deaths and two hospitals is they are completely disorganized and far too many of the staff are themselves co-morbid,
In Sweden, they gave those who were going to die Morphine to keep them out of hospitals and focused on keeping their health service functioning the net effect was to save lives and reduce the chances of excess mortality overall. Tough but right!
The NHS, however, is only a part of the problem it is tasked with keeping a Tsumani of elderly people alive way beyond any period of grace and dignity rather than making hard choices so they are free to do constructive life-saving work. It is constantly overwhelmed by the elderly and the real message of the Great Panic is not to panic when people right at the end of their lives are faced with a virus to which they have no immunity.
20,000 nursing home residents died of the Virus in 2020 which was out of a total of 170,000 deaths. Old people die!
However, this misses the core of the fallacy of Lockdown. The rest of the fit healthy and active population was never at risk from this new virus. Millions upon millions of people have had the virus and I am talking about pre-vaccination, felt rough for two days and got over it, that is the group that should have been allowed to get on with their lives and simply be very cautious around their elderly relatives. We all know that works because by the summer of 2020, the handful of hotspots left was amongst the communities which lived multi-generational and have low levels of compliance. But again the tail was allowed to wag the dog. My daughter actually lives in the epicenter of the Virus in the UK, Bolton, and even there it was down to certain wards having the virus, not the entire town let alone Greater Manchester. Go in and educate those wards!!
Lockdowns were not tough they were a lazy answer. The tough brave policy was to funnel the elderly which ironically is what China did and it worked during the first crucial weeks. They got their medical response right they just made a much bigger error with society as a whole. And as an aside where are the mass deaths which were forecast when the Chinese let it rip a few weeks ago? Even at the end of this debacle, the Western Press continues to scare monger.
I will finish with a personal reflection. Last summer I went to the Island of Lombok and amongst other things climbed Mount Rinjani from one of the local villages. My guides were local. I asked them about their experiences.
The reply was if we had not had news of it on the TV we would have had no idea it existed maybe some people got it but it was just another minor ailment. Meanwhile, they went fishing every day while the Island was Empty of tourists and the government closed them down. There wasn’t a mask to be had. That really put it in perspective for me.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

I think you put too much stock in how you saw aggregated numbers and not the reality on the ground in health services. Services were overwhelmed and even if Govt has grasped the mettle sooner than they did it’s not clear the measures you suggest (albeit a bit vague still) could have been introduced quickly enough. Targeting seems a simple solution until you actually get into the mechanics of how that would work quickly.
Some coalface figures from my own experience – my local hospital had 4 patients admitted with Covid diagnosis on 28th Feb 2020. It had 542 by 10th April, 30% of staff off sick, and another c25% we had to place in a lower risk environment. (Ref: Hospital had c700 beds in total). The ability to deliver other hospital care was massively compromised.
Whether the Lockdown initiated in late March helped stem the transmission and hospitalisation rate, or whether that would have happened anyway I’m v keen the Public Inquiry investigates. But at the time it’s entirely understandable we locked down, and if anything a bit too late. Subsequent winter 20/21 Lockdowns much more debatable IMO

Michelle Johnston
Michelle Johnston
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

It was already established when the Virus was acknowledged in the financial times on 20th January 2020 that three groups were vulnerable.
1) The elderly.
2) Comorbid.
3) Overworked medical staff not properly protected.
All the focus should have been on developing further health protocols for the first two groups and making them aware they were high-risk. In addition, the low-paid multi jobing care home workers should have been given rigorous training and education. In Melbourne Australia, that group spread the Virus even whilst lockdowns were in place. It was a 90/10 problem always was.
As I said that group remains in large numbers hidden away.
Europe also very quickly recognized for the fit working population it was unpleasant but not dangerous.
I appreciate I have a degree-level qualification in quantitive statistics and understand numbers in a way others do not but death rates peaked within one cycle of transmission (14 days) after lockdowns were instituted. In New Zealand which was locked down on the same day as the UK, they plateaued on the day of lockdown and fell back. This outcome happened all over Europe death rates peaked before the theoretical benefits of slowing transmission emerged from lockdown, the converse of Melbourne where the death rate increased for 56 days from the day of the most stringent lockdown simply because the multi-tasking low-paid care workers continued to go to work with the virus. That is the one group that should have been tested and every day before entering the building. ACTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN TARGETED.
It is a fallacy to say we did not know, no one was listening in the Great Panic.
Between March 2020 and March 2023 1.795 million people died in England and Wales. Less than 200,000 ” Involved” Covid. That is three years in which flu deaths would typically be 70,000. That is just short of the 3-1 that Johann Gieseke predicted ….. without intervention. No lives were saved here, no lives have been saved in New Zealand it’s hubris to think you can stop the elderly comorbid dying when a new respiratory illness comes along.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

Come one Freddie that was a bit ‘woe is me’. You almost sound like a Brexit Remainer struggling to understand that bit of hari-kuri and the irony was not lost on some of us I’m sure.
The analysis of Covid policies has not finished in many countries and in some it hasn’t yet started – e.g UK. The really useful analysis of comparable Lockdown impacts will percolate into these and into future Policy. And concur with some other comments that Unherd pushing these different assessments is of significant social value. The percolation just takes a while.
The role of ‘fear’ in driving Policy compliance also needs serious Public Inquiry reflection. But it’s a broader issue as we know with many elements on the political spectrum using unfounded fear when it suits. Let’s not cherry pick the occasions when we call that out.
However would add I think a failure to distinguish between the initial Lockdowns and then those that followed in winter 2020-21 is not helping and too simplistic. We all had much less appreciation of the Virus during March 20 and much less ordnance with which to fight.
I also think Unherd has lacked Articles illuminating what it was like at the coalface in hospitals those first few weeks when we were overwhelmed and frightened. Transmission rate had to slow and the tools to do that at this stage were v limited and inevitably crude. We could have been much better prepared and more analysis of why we weren’t needs to also be illuminated.

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago

Great article.

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago

Great article.

Andrew Wise
Andrew Wise
1 year ago

I don’t see any reference to the original question asked in your poll – but if its anything like the other polls you have run recently you will get the unexpected answers you report on all topics.
We all know you can get any answer you want in a poll by the way you ask the question – and all the questions I have seen published from your recent polls have weirdly ‘double negative’ type statements that invite misinterpretation or ambiguity,
Having said that – I was surprised at how supine the population were at the most egregious infringement of personal liberties ever. Presumably the public need to still believe it was a good idea otherwise the cognitive dissonance would make their heads explode 🙂

Andrew Wise
Andrew Wise
1 year ago

I don’t see any reference to the original question asked in your poll – but if its anything like the other polls you have run recently you will get the unexpected answers you report on all topics.
We all know you can get any answer you want in a poll by the way you ask the question – and all the questions I have seen published from your recent polls have weirdly ‘double negative’ type statements that invite misinterpretation or ambiguity,
Having said that – I was surprised at how supine the population were at the most egregious infringement of personal liberties ever. Presumably the public need to still believe it was a good idea otherwise the cognitive dissonance would make their heads explode 🙂

David Sinclair
David Sinclair
1 year ago

Bless you Freddie Sayers for your calm, lucid and above all logical approach to this vexatious issue. You describe the situation and frame the arguments with absolute clarity and precision. Some people did enjoy the clampdown – the empty streets, the simplified range of options, the sense that you were no longer missing out on anything by sitting safely at home in front of the screen. And a lot of people (as your poll reveals) remain persuaded that it was the “right thing” to do. Stopping society in its tracks was a fearful and selfish over-reaction by older generation(s) to a genuine problem. Younger people, and especially schoolchildren – none of them at serious risk – should never have been dragged into it.

David Sinclair
David Sinclair
1 year ago

Bless you Freddie Sayers for your calm, lucid and above all logical approach to this vexatious issue. You describe the situation and frame the arguments with absolute clarity and precision. Some people did enjoy the clampdown – the empty streets, the simplified range of options, the sense that you were no longer missing out on anything by sitting safely at home in front of the screen. And a lot of people (as your poll reveals) remain persuaded that it was the “right thing” to do. Stopping society in its tracks was a fearful and selfish over-reaction by older generation(s) to a genuine problem. Younger people, and especially schoolchildren – none of them at serious risk – should never have been dragged into it.

Michael Walsh
Michael Walsh
1 year ago

Thanks Freddie – totally agree with you on this one.
I no longer trust our civil service, media or politicians.
(as an aside – the one thing I finally realised at the beginning of the hysteria was why my Grandparents / grand aunts etc – kept the windows open and always gave handkerchiefs as a present – they’d lived through various epidemics)

Michael Walsh
Michael Walsh
1 year ago

Thanks Freddie – totally agree with you on this one.
I no longer trust our civil service, media or politicians.
(as an aside – the one thing I finally realised at the beginning of the hysteria was why my Grandparents / grand aunts etc – kept the windows open and always gave handkerchiefs as a present – they’d lived through various epidemics)

Tony Lee
Tony Lee
1 year ago

Self-interest overwhelmed any desire to stand against the wave of suddenly ‘famous for 10 minutes’ so called scientific experts and the politicians only too pleased to line up behind them and play the role of saviour of the nation. It was simply too good an opportunity and none of them have had the backbone to accept they even might have been wrong. It really is quite incredible to recognise that the most sceptical electorate in history, might still believe that such unnecessary suffering and damage was justified on the basis of such a lily livered pretence about protecting the nation as a whole. Sadly, we get the leaders we deserve.

Dave Smith
Dave Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Lee

I have been very pleased that all my five children independently came to the same conclusion. That the state was trying to enforce compliance and that this was wrong. My oldest daughter mixing with the professional and academic classes felt very isolated but refused to back down and join the herd and endured some isolation . We must have brought them up the right way somehow.
My father was a very independent thinking man and maybe it is part of our inheritance to be hard to rule. We like to go our own way and work for ourselves on the land or off it at trade or craft. My oldest grandson is continuing the tradition refusing university to learn real old time steam engineering. My advice to set the young on the right path is to give them the works of Tom Paine and William Cobbett and Orwell. Sets their minds right as they say. Then to me the answer is simple. Most people are brought up to trust governments and the ruling class. I never was . With a solid background in dissent it was a foregone conclusion that the lockdown and the enforced removal of our old freedoms would never sit well with me or my offspring.

Dave Smith
Dave Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Lee

I have been very pleased that all my five children independently came to the same conclusion. That the state was trying to enforce compliance and that this was wrong. My oldest daughter mixing with the professional and academic classes felt very isolated but refused to back down and join the herd and endured some isolation . We must have brought them up the right way somehow.
My father was a very independent thinking man and maybe it is part of our inheritance to be hard to rule. We like to go our own way and work for ourselves on the land or off it at trade or craft. My oldest grandson is continuing the tradition refusing university to learn real old time steam engineering. My advice to set the young on the right path is to give them the works of Tom Paine and William Cobbett and Orwell. Sets their minds right as they say. Then to me the answer is simple. Most people are brought up to trust governments and the ruling class. I never was . With a solid background in dissent it was a foregone conclusion that the lockdown and the enforced removal of our old freedoms would never sit well with me or my offspring.

Tony Lee
Tony Lee
1 year ago

Self-interest overwhelmed any desire to stand against the wave of suddenly ‘famous for 10 minutes’ so called scientific experts and the politicians only too pleased to line up behind them and play the role of saviour of the nation. It was simply too good an opportunity and none of them have had the backbone to accept they even might have been wrong. It really is quite incredible to recognise that the most sceptical electorate in history, might still believe that such unnecessary suffering and damage was justified on the basis of such a lily livered pretence about protecting the nation as a whole. Sadly, we get the leaders we deserve.

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago

Freddie decries that we haven’t realized the error of our ways, but he hasn’t either.
Freddie calls himself a man of the Left. He generally favors strong, big-government solutions to problems. Well, Freddie, COVID is the perfect example of a strong-big government solution to a problem… and the government(s) throughout the world failed miserably.
Will that cause you to re-evaluate your faith in government solutions in general, Freddie? The technocracy failed so completely on COVID. Why do you think they will do better with medical care, poverty, hunger, racial justice, class inequality, or any of the other problems you want them to solve?

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago

One thing about being a “man of the Left” is that critical, or even rational thinking is not required.

On its simplest level, medical care and hunger are quite simple concepts. Whether an individual is sick or malnourished is a matter of statistics and observation. Temperature? Irregular heartbeat? Arthritis? Diarrhea? Severely underweight? Not difficult, are they?

But now we come to the hard part. Poverty, for example is largely subjective. Our parents’ material expectations were not ours. Racial justice is quite simple on one level – a sign saying “no blacks served at this counter” clearly doesn’t comply – but where does it end?

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago

One thing about being a “man of the Left” is that critical, or even rational thinking is not required.

On its simplest level, medical care and hunger are quite simple concepts. Whether an individual is sick or malnourished is a matter of statistics and observation. Temperature? Irregular heartbeat? Arthritis? Diarrhea? Severely underweight? Not difficult, are they?

But now we come to the hard part. Poverty, for example is largely subjective. Our parents’ material expectations were not ours. Racial justice is quite simple on one level – a sign saying “no blacks served at this counter” clearly doesn’t comply – but where does it end?

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago

Freddie decries that we haven’t realized the error of our ways, but he hasn’t either.
Freddie calls himself a man of the Left. He generally favors strong, big-government solutions to problems. Well, Freddie, COVID is the perfect example of a strong-big government solution to a problem… and the government(s) throughout the world failed miserably.
Will that cause you to re-evaluate your faith in government solutions in general, Freddie? The technocracy failed so completely on COVID. Why do you think they will do better with medical care, poverty, hunger, racial justice, class inequality, or any of the other problems you want them to solve?

Tharmananthar Shankaradhas
Tharmananthar Shankaradhas
1 year ago

Collectively it is hard to admit our mistakes especially when most are/were insulated from the economic consequences. Most politicians have shied away from linking current inflation and low growth as the price of lockdown and in particular consequence of furlough. Democracies are not immune from poor decisions and only if there are long term negative consequence that requires resetting our thinking will we admit to error of our ways. Sadly most politicians out of necessity rarely point out poor decisions of the voters and their consequences!

Tharmananthar Shankaradhas
Tharmananthar Shankaradhas
1 year ago

Collectively it is hard to admit our mistakes especially when most are/were insulated from the economic consequences. Most politicians have shied away from linking current inflation and low growth as the price of lockdown and in particular consequence of furlough. Democracies are not immune from poor decisions and only if there are long term negative consequence that requires resetting our thinking will we admit to error of our ways. Sadly most politicians out of necessity rarely point out poor decisions of the voters and their consequences!

Alan Bright
Alan Bright
1 year ago

“Over that strange period, we were reminded of something important about human nature: when frightened, people will choose security over freedom”
The below from Orwell’s Brave New World:
“But I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.”
“In fact,” said Mustapha Mond, “you’re claiming the right to be unhappy.”
“All right then,” said the Savage defiantly, “I’m claiming the right to be unhappy.”
“Not to mention the right to grow old and ugly and impotent; the right to have syphilis and cancer; the right to have too little to eat; the right to be lousy; the right to live in constant apprehension of what may happen to-morrow; the right to catch typhoid; the right to be tortured by unspeakable pains of every kind.” There was a long silence.
“I claim them all,” said the Savage at last.

andrew harman
andrew harman
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Bright

I think you will find it was Aldous Huxley who wrote Brave New World

andrew harman
andrew harman
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Bright

I think you will find it was Aldous Huxley who wrote Brave New World

Alan Bright
Alan Bright
1 year ago

“Over that strange period, we were reminded of something important about human nature: when frightened, people will choose security over freedom”
The below from Orwell’s Brave New World:
“But I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.”
“In fact,” said Mustapha Mond, “you’re claiming the right to be unhappy.”
“All right then,” said the Savage defiantly, “I’m claiming the right to be unhappy.”
“Not to mention the right to grow old and ugly and impotent; the right to have syphilis and cancer; the right to have too little to eat; the right to be lousy; the right to live in constant apprehension of what may happen to-morrow; the right to catch typhoid; the right to be tortured by unspeakable pains of every kind.” There was a long silence.
“I claim them all,” said the Savage at last.

James Kirk
James Kirk
1 year ago

We hardly locked down at all. Distribution barely faltered, the supermarkets were open, young people on the beaches, sheds turned into bars, not air raid shelters, it was a booze up. Those who were stupid about it already were. Stupid. The masks, the curtain twitchers. The damage is done, the milk spilt. Why go on about it? If boring tedious whining were a commodity our GDP would go through the roof. Be grateful we weren’t Australia, NZ or China.

James Kirk
James Kirk
1 year ago

We hardly locked down at all. Distribution barely faltered, the supermarkets were open, young people on the beaches, sheds turned into bars, not air raid shelters, it was a booze up. Those who were stupid about it already were. Stupid. The masks, the curtain twitchers. The damage is done, the milk spilt. Why go on about it? If boring tedious whining were a commodity our GDP would go through the roof. Be grateful we weren’t Australia, NZ or China.

Alex Cranberg
Alex Cranberg
1 year ago

Brilliant. But incomplete. Why no regret? Its not just the choice of security over freedom (that drove the initial reactions). The lack of regret has more to do with a different element of human psychology. That is the strong emotional bond to a strong belief (even if that belief is demonstrably incorrect). In todays tribal culture that emotional bond is even harder to break.

Matthew Parris
Matthew Parris
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Cranberg

True – and disturbing. For some of us, this cri de coeur is blast of oxygen in a stale room. Thanks, Freddie, for keeping the flame alive during a dark time. But the auguries are not good. My faith in popular support for liberty has been, like Freddie’s, seriously shaken. How thin is the veneer and how easily broken.

Charlie Tryon
Charlie Tryon
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Parris

Here here. One little talked about point is the power of propaganda. Most people in a modern liberal society feel that propaganda is the preserve of dictatorial states; not so. The government came out hard in defence of their policy and the nation bought it, hook, line and sinker. Most Britons were shocked into compliance and comply they did.
I weathered much of COVID in East Africa where no such government campaign was waged, nor lockdowns imposed. We survived and shrugged off COVID with many more pressing priorities and diseases to concern ourselves with. From a foreigner perspective when travelling back to the UK during COVID I found the national atmosphere was septic. Positions on the pandemic were more polarised than Brexit. Perhaps they remain so because the government and media have suppressed the honest narrative that they wrong. No one likes to admit it, particularly when you ruined millions of people’s lives and livelihoods for 2 years or more. Educations interrupted, businesses destroyed, life events cancelled, funerals by zoom, government PPE corruption scandals, NHS waiting lists exploded, tax rises, wholesale change to working habits and productivity and premature deaths as a result of late diagnoses or no treatment during COVID. From a more objective viewpoint from 4000 miles, Matthew is right, the veneer is wafer thin. The boiling frogs need to be more aware of their surroundings.

Charlie Tryon
Charlie Tryon
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Parris

Here here. One little talked about point is the power of propaganda. Most people in a modern liberal society feel that propaganda is the preserve of dictatorial states; not so. The government came out hard in defence of their policy and the nation bought it, hook, line and sinker. Most Britons were shocked into compliance and comply they did.
I weathered much of COVID in East Africa where no such government campaign was waged, nor lockdowns imposed. We survived and shrugged off COVID with many more pressing priorities and diseases to concern ourselves with. From a foreigner perspective when travelling back to the UK during COVID I found the national atmosphere was septic. Positions on the pandemic were more polarised than Brexit. Perhaps they remain so because the government and media have suppressed the honest narrative that they wrong. No one likes to admit it, particularly when you ruined millions of people’s lives and livelihoods for 2 years or more. Educations interrupted, businesses destroyed, life events cancelled, funerals by zoom, government PPE corruption scandals, NHS waiting lists exploded, tax rises, wholesale change to working habits and productivity and premature deaths as a result of late diagnoses or no treatment during COVID. From a more objective viewpoint from 4000 miles, Matthew is right, the veneer is wafer thin. The boiling frogs need to be more aware of their surroundings.

Matthew Parris
Matthew Parris
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Cranberg

True – and disturbing. For some of us, this cri de coeur is blast of oxygen in a stale room. Thanks, Freddie, for keeping the flame alive during a dark time. But the auguries are not good. My faith in popular support for liberty has been, like Freddie’s, seriously shaken. How thin is the veneer and how easily broken.

Alex Cranberg
Alex Cranberg
1 year ago

Brilliant. But incomplete. Why no regret? Its not just the choice of security over freedom (that drove the initial reactions). The lack of regret has more to do with a different element of human psychology. That is the strong emotional bond to a strong belief (even if that belief is demonstrably incorrect). In todays tribal culture that emotional bond is even harder to break.

G A Braine
G A Braine
1 year ago

I think the problem is UnHerd have a load of guardian readers who basically want their government to control them, no backbone! Lockdown was the most divisive and destructive policy implemented by a globalist regime. People were so scared, and this was a plandemic! I’ve lost all faith in humanity now, we have moved from democracy to autocracy, weak leaders with weak followers. So depressing the UK, nothing is fun and everyone just lives on their phone.

G A Braine
G A Braine
1 year ago

I think the problem is UnHerd have a load of guardian readers who basically want their government to control them, no backbone! Lockdown was the most divisive and destructive policy implemented by a globalist regime. People were so scared, and this was a plandemic! I’ve lost all faith in humanity now, we have moved from democracy to autocracy, weak leaders with weak followers. So depressing the UK, nothing is fun and everyone just lives on their phone.

Matthew Grainger
Matthew Grainger
1 year ago

An excellent article which perfectly sums up my own feelings on what has occurred over the last three years. It is hard to not have not lost some significant faith in humanity after this episode. The ‘Lockdown Files’ were perhaps the nearest we will ever get to any kind of inquiry and unfortunately, I suspect the public will have focused on further confirming Matt Hancock’s incompetence, rather than the enormous, systemic incompetence of governments across the world in their handling of the crisis.
Deducing from this poll that the bulk of the UK population still supports lockdowns does not bode well for the next pandemic, and worse still, it increases the likelihood in my view that populations can be easily coerced and prodded into a more authoritarian direction.

Last edited 1 year ago by Matthew Grainger
Matthew Grainger
Matthew Grainger
1 year ago

An excellent article which perfectly sums up my own feelings on what has occurred over the last three years. It is hard to not have not lost some significant faith in humanity after this episode. The ‘Lockdown Files’ were perhaps the nearest we will ever get to any kind of inquiry and unfortunately, I suspect the public will have focused on further confirming Matt Hancock’s incompetence, rather than the enormous, systemic incompetence of governments across the world in their handling of the crisis.
Deducing from this poll that the bulk of the UK population still supports lockdowns does not bode well for the next pandemic, and worse still, it increases the likelihood in my view that populations can be easily coerced and prodded into a more authoritarian direction.

Last edited 1 year ago by Matthew Grainger
Mark V
Mark V
1 year ago

Yes well the problem with direct democracy is most people are stupid, which is why we have hypothetically wiser representatives to make decisions instead of putting everything to a referendum.
This has somehow gone awry.

Mark V
Mark V
1 year ago

Yes well the problem with direct democracy is most people are stupid, which is why we have hypothetically wiser representatives to make decisions instead of putting everything to a referendum.
This has somehow gone awry.

neil collins
neil collins
1 year ago

I wonder whether, one day not too far distant, you will be able to run the same (convincing) arguments about the groupthink and lack of objective analysis over global warming.

neil collins
neil collins
1 year ago

I wonder whether, one day not too far distant, you will be able to run the same (convincing) arguments about the groupthink and lack of objective analysis over global warming.

Chauncey Gardiner
Chauncey Gardiner
1 year ago

Well, brother … One candidate answer to the question, “Why is everything insane,” would be, “most of the electorate approves”.
For example, one might puzzle over the re-election of officials in Victoria (Australia). But, annual polls by the Lowy Institute suggest that most Australians have themselves approved of “NPI’s” (“non-pharmacological interventions”) like lockdowns.
One might wonder that much the same is true with respect to all of the “gender” business or to “climate” initiatives or to the business of war, glorious war.
Perhaps it’s not so much the case that the “elites” are forcing their “Marxist” initiatives on the rest of us, but, collectively, we really do get the government we vote for. Collectively, we are a bunch of war-mongering freaks. Collectively, we want our poisonous boosters. Collectively, we approve of lockdowns, and we look forward to “climate lockdowns.” We approve of open borders, and we love our drugs. (Do we ever love our drugs.) We look forward to our own immiseration, Because the Latest Thing.

Chauncey Gardiner
Chauncey Gardiner
1 year ago

Well, brother … One candidate answer to the question, “Why is everything insane,” would be, “most of the electorate approves”.
For example, one might puzzle over the re-election of officials in Victoria (Australia). But, annual polls by the Lowy Institute suggest that most Australians have themselves approved of “NPI’s” (“non-pharmacological interventions”) like lockdowns.
One might wonder that much the same is true with respect to all of the “gender” business or to “climate” initiatives or to the business of war, glorious war.
Perhaps it’s not so much the case that the “elites” are forcing their “Marxist” initiatives on the rest of us, but, collectively, we really do get the government we vote for. Collectively, we are a bunch of war-mongering freaks. Collectively, we want our poisonous boosters. Collectively, we approve of lockdowns, and we look forward to “climate lockdowns.” We approve of open borders, and we love our drugs. (Do we ever love our drugs.) We look forward to our own immiseration, Because the Latest Thing.

Dick Stroud
Dick Stroud
1 year ago

Excellent article. If I read any more comments in the media along the lines ‘It’s easy to be wise after the event’ and ‘you can be too careful’ I will go crazy.

Dick Stroud
Dick Stroud
1 year ago

Excellent article. If I read any more comments in the media along the lines ‘It’s easy to be wise after the event’ and ‘you can be too careful’ I will go crazy.

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago

Can we just make something quite clear? The 30% or so who worked on did not do so because they had “difficult jobs”, they mostly did so because they had few, or no real options.

Agency or contract workers on construction sites, railways, cleaning, picking crops, stacking shelves or sorting mail and to some extent, serving food were not offered furlough. “It is your risk” said the people who had forced them into that position – because let’s be quite clear about this, few such workers do it from choice.

I see now, the government and employers crying great salt tears about “the difficulty of getting people back to work”. Well, yes; people who were treated that way aren’t likely to be enthusiastic.

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago

Can we just make something quite clear? The 30% or so who worked on did not do so because they had “difficult jobs”, they mostly did so because they had few, or no real options.

Agency or contract workers on construction sites, railways, cleaning, picking crops, stacking shelves or sorting mail and to some extent, serving food were not offered furlough. “It is your risk” said the people who had forced them into that position – because let’s be quite clear about this, few such workers do it from choice.

I see now, the government and employers crying great salt tears about “the difficulty of getting people back to work”. Well, yes; people who were treated that way aren’t likely to be enthusiastic.

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago

It is so depressing, that so many people unquestionably follow the MSM and politicians for their main info.
Who knows next time we are locked down for the “Climate Apocalypse”. Just read, that a big percentage of people in Germany are keen on a mandatory CO2 allowance for every citizen. It basically means you have to chose between the warmth of your house, having a pet, a vacation, eating meat, etc., and I guess, the State will somehow control, that everybody sticks to their CO2 allowance. It seems to have worked so well with the Covid lockdown and compliance for the vaccination uptake… The recent IPCC report was eagerly picked up by the MSM, State TV and politicians, trying to scare the population of a horrible futuristic vision of a “burning planet”, where we will starve to death and extinction of many animal species, droughts and floods, basically biblical doom and gloom for our planet.
Never thought that the public is so mendable and obedient.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago

It is so depressing, that so many people unquestionably follow the MSM and politicians for their main info.
Who knows next time we are locked down for the “Climate Apocalypse”. Just read, that a big percentage of people in Germany are keen on a mandatory CO2 allowance for every citizen. It basically means you have to chose between the warmth of your house, having a pet, a vacation, eating meat, etc., and I guess, the State will somehow control, that everybody sticks to their CO2 allowance. It seems to have worked so well with the Covid lockdown and compliance for the vaccination uptake… The recent IPCC report was eagerly picked up by the MSM, State TV and politicians, trying to scare the population of a horrible futuristic vision of a “burning planet”, where we will starve to death and extinction of many animal species, droughts and floods, basically biblical doom and gloom for our planet.
Never thought that the public is so mendable and obedient.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stephanie Surface
Fredrich Nicecar
Fredrich Nicecar
1 year ago

I despair !

Fredrich Nicecar
Fredrich Nicecar
1 year ago

I despair !

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago

I suspect it all started in the seventies with safety at all costs. ‘No playing in the dirt’ , wear a cycle helmet etc etc. safety at all costs. If we save one life then it’s all worth it.
Motto for life. “ if it’s a conspiracy theory, it’s probably the truth”.
It was known from day one if you were slim and fit. There was very little risk.

Last edited 1 year ago by Peter Lee
Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago

I suspect it all started in the seventies with safety at all costs. ‘No playing in the dirt’ , wear a cycle helmet etc etc. safety at all costs. If we save one life then it’s all worth it.
Motto for life. “ if it’s a conspiracy theory, it’s probably the truth”.
It was known from day one if you were slim and fit. There was very little risk.

Last edited 1 year ago by Peter Lee
Vici C
Vici C
1 year ago

To be honest when it all kicked off I was afraid of getting ill (I hate even getting flu). I think we were stunned and accepted that we didn’t want to be in a place where the NHS couldn’t cope. So I accepted it. It was the procedure for other plagues in the past and it made sense. Once we had the jabs though, I saw no reason for more lockdowns, though, unbidden, I wouldn’t have wanted to pass it on to the vulnerable. But it all went swiftly downhill thereafter. In the future I would hope the government would leave us to make our own decisions.

Vici C
Vici C
1 year ago

To be honest when it all kicked off I was afraid of getting ill (I hate even getting flu). I think we were stunned and accepted that we didn’t want to be in a place where the NHS couldn’t cope. So I accepted it. It was the procedure for other plagues in the past and it made sense. Once we had the jabs though, I saw no reason for more lockdowns, though, unbidden, I wouldn’t have wanted to pass it on to the vulnerable. But it all went swiftly downhill thereafter. In the future I would hope the government would leave us to make our own decisions.

Mark epperson
Mark epperson
1 year ago

It’s easy, although in the US the mistake numbers are higher and growing. Americans, as a nation, have become sheep, lost their critical thinking skills, and are more into feeling than thinking.

Mark epperson
Mark epperson
1 year ago

It’s easy, although in the US the mistake numbers are higher and growing. Americans, as a nation, have become sheep, lost their critical thinking skills, and are more into feeling than thinking.

Michael Kellett
Michael Kellett
1 year ago

I’m definitely and firmly with you Freddie!

Michael Kellett
Michael Kellett
1 year ago

I’m definitely and firmly with you Freddie!

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago

Im 68 and I’m in the sceptic,redacted and Russell Brand watching camp. I did NOT lockdown. I just went on living my normal life. But as my normal life is very like lockdown anyway no one noticed. Boris did not obey the rules. I did not obey the rules. But I didn’t make the rules. And being invisible and unimportant no one cared anyway. There is going to be another Pandemic ,you can bet your bottom dollar. The last one was so much fun- for some people and so much money was made.
In fact Bill Gates,(I never got why people accused him of being behind everything until I saw him being interviewed,creepy) has made a video telling us EVERYTHING about the next Pandemic,he’s only guessing of course,but so lucky for us,he’s built up a huge stock of the vaccine for this next pandemic that we can buy off him at reduced price. That man is so considerate. Bill says the next virus is based on polio (just a guess) and even if we survive it we may be brain damaged or paralysed. Only ultimately the last virus just want scary ENOUGH.

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago

Im 68 and I’m in the sceptic,redacted and Russell Brand watching camp. I did NOT lockdown. I just went on living my normal life. But as my normal life is very like lockdown anyway no one noticed. Boris did not obey the rules. I did not obey the rules. But I didn’t make the rules. And being invisible and unimportant no one cared anyway. There is going to be another Pandemic ,you can bet your bottom dollar. The last one was so much fun- for some people and so much money was made.
In fact Bill Gates,(I never got why people accused him of being behind everything until I saw him being interviewed,creepy) has made a video telling us EVERYTHING about the next Pandemic,he’s only guessing of course,but so lucky for us,he’s built up a huge stock of the vaccine for this next pandemic that we can buy off him at reduced price. That man is so considerate. Bill says the next virus is based on polio (just a guess) and even if we survive it we may be brain damaged or paralysed. Only ultimately the last virus just want scary ENOUGH.

Michael Sinclair
Michael Sinclair
1 year ago

I agree with this article but it’s also essential to ask why do a majority of people act one way? The way we have witnessed these last three years ? One answer can be found in the 1952 ‘Solomon Asch experiment’ concerning individual and group conformity. Please take time and view the original on UTube.
Via UnHerd in London ’21, I had the pleasure of meeting Profs. Bhattacharya and Kulldorff (Stamford/Harvard), co authors of the Great Barrington Declaration (averse to lockdowns) and both frequently interviewed on UnHerd, especially the former. Prof. Bhattacharya also posted conversations on UTube with John Anderson in Australia about the effects of lockdowns, and the governer in Florida, DeSantis, a state which had avoided lockdown, with Florida’s facts and figures compared with California’s where lockdowns seemed endless – please view.
In general two things predominate from lockdowns – inflation, the economic cost, and a societal disconnect.
When I asked the two professors if the 1952 Solomon Asch experiment was indeed an exemplar of individual v majority behaviour, in these circumstances, they both readily agreed – glad to have this mentioned. I’m not a die hard % argument guy, but, I have read that 75% of people will agree with majorty opinion, at least once, knowing it to be wrong ! It is very hard, as I think we all know, to step away from, to be outside of, the majority. The number amongst us who are curiuos, value doubt, educate ourselves with whatever facts are available, is very, very small.

Last edited 1 year ago by Michael Sinclair
Michael Sinclair
Michael Sinclair
1 year ago

I agree with this article but it’s also essential to ask why do a majority of people act one way? The way we have witnessed these last three years ? One answer can be found in the 1952 ‘Solomon Asch experiment’ concerning individual and group conformity. Please take time and view the original on UTube.
Via UnHerd in London ’21, I had the pleasure of meeting Profs. Bhattacharya and Kulldorff (Stamford/Harvard), co authors of the Great Barrington Declaration (averse to lockdowns) and both frequently interviewed on UnHerd, especially the former. Prof. Bhattacharya also posted conversations on UTube with John Anderson in Australia about the effects of lockdowns, and the governer in Florida, DeSantis, a state which had avoided lockdown, with Florida’s facts and figures compared with California’s where lockdowns seemed endless – please view.
In general two things predominate from lockdowns – inflation, the economic cost, and a societal disconnect.
When I asked the two professors if the 1952 Solomon Asch experiment was indeed an exemplar of individual v majority behaviour, in these circumstances, they both readily agreed – glad to have this mentioned. I’m not a die hard % argument guy, but, I have read that 75% of people will agree with majorty opinion, at least once, knowing it to be wrong ! It is very hard, as I think we all know, to step away from, to be outside of, the majority. The number amongst us who are curiuos, value doubt, educate ourselves with whatever facts are available, is very, very small.

Last edited 1 year ago by Michael Sinclair
Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago

Thank you.
I disagree, though, with the statement “there was no real data as to whether lockdowns worked”. The WHO’s September 2019 publication “Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza” (ISBN 978-92-4-151683-9) reviewed the evidence and said that the non-pharmaceutical interventions did not work (or only in specific situations/for a very narrow window in time), and were legally and ethically problematical.
Also, all countries have developed protocols for pandemic preparedness, and there are parliamentary committees tasked with implementing them in cooperation with executive offices – these were all shunted aside and pandemic management given to self-appointed “experts” who circumvented all principles of good governance (non-disclosure of conflicts, meetings without minutes, no formal authority or reporting lines).
There were other red-flag “oddities” – prohibiting physicians from treating patients under threat of sanction (never done before); simply ignoring occupational health and safety laws (regarding mask-wearing); ignoring medical licensing principles; deploying psyops; etc.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago

Thank you.
I disagree, though, with the statement “there was no real data as to whether lockdowns worked”. The WHO’s September 2019 publication “Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza” (ISBN 978-92-4-151683-9) reviewed the evidence and said that the non-pharmaceutical interventions did not work (or only in specific situations/for a very narrow window in time), and were legally and ethically problematical.
Also, all countries have developed protocols for pandemic preparedness, and there are parliamentary committees tasked with implementing them in cooperation with executive offices – these were all shunted aside and pandemic management given to self-appointed “experts” who circumvented all principles of good governance (non-disclosure of conflicts, meetings without minutes, no formal authority or reporting lines).
There were other red-flag “oddities” – prohibiting physicians from treating patients under threat of sanction (never done before); simply ignoring occupational health and safety laws (regarding mask-wearing); ignoring medical licensing principles; deploying psyops; etc.

Gerard Delahunty
Gerard Delahunty
1 year ago

Not so sure it’s as much to do with fear as it is to do with the fact that people like to think well of themselves and are determined to go on doing it.

Gerard Delahunty
Gerard Delahunty
1 year ago

Not so sure it’s as much to do with fear as it is to do with the fact that people like to think well of themselves and are determined to go on doing it.

Su Mac
Su Mac
1 year ago

Nice to read Freddie’s own words for a change and I am still pleased to think that I am in the company of many, many smart principled people in that 12% I don’t agree with all the UnHerd writers but I have renewed my annual subscription.

Su Mac
Su Mac
1 year ago

Nice to read Freddie’s own words for a change and I am still pleased to think that I am in the company of many, many smart principled people in that 12% I don’t agree with all the UnHerd writers but I have renewed my annual subscription.

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
1 year ago

“people will choose security over freedom” – too true! And those who owe their very wealth to freedom are the ones who are afraid to harm that wealth. We have the much debated Ben Franklin quote to remind us. And we ended up with neither freedom nor security as the virus spread among us all. Much better to have allowed the spread and spent our efforts to improved access to health care.

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
1 year ago

“people will choose security over freedom” – too true! And those who owe their very wealth to freedom are the ones who are afraid to harm that wealth. We have the much debated Ben Franklin quote to remind us. And we ended up with neither freedom nor security as the virus spread among us all. Much better to have allowed the spread and spent our efforts to improved access to health care.

Nicholas Taylor
Nicholas Taylor
1 year ago

I agree with much in the article. One thing I would quarrel with is the uncritical way the term ‘lockdown’ is used. The only real ‘lockdown’ in the UK that I recall was the first few weeks beginning the last week of March. Being a few km from open country I was soon out in it for whole days, like many others, especially as the weather was generally good during the Pandemic. Sometimes I was the only one on a bus. I’ve no idea how many people stuck to 20 minutes or an hour or 2 miles from home or whatever it was, and how many genuinely believed they had to stay shut in their homes for months on end.
‘Lockout’ is a different matter, whether it was from ‘inessential’ shops and restaurants, probably unnecessary and just damaging to the economy, or from schools and universities, which I believe is still undecided. I concur with loss of confidence in authority and expertise. While “You must stay at home”, people were coming and going between hospitals and care homes, with the tragic result we know, road traffic might be down but there were still cars driving who knows where or why, and finally our leaders concluded that only idiots bother with social distancing. Like those people who stood back two metres as one passed them on a country footpath, but presumably kept on shopping in supermarkets like everyone else.
Peaks of infection seemed to follow a consistent course of rise and fall over about four months though some peaks merged. People died, but the death rate relative to recorded cases was massively greater in the first four months than any time after, and no-one really knew what worked until the vaccines arrived, so I guess each country behaved in character.

Mark Gilmour
Mark Gilmour
1 year ago

This is what happens in a socialistic system when you externalise costs. The same could be said for so many elements of our system which kicks the can down the road for the next government to sort out and the next generation to pay for.

What proportion of the 27% who agreed with the statement were self employed or small business owners? Do many of those who lost their businesses and livelihoods agree with those statements?

Those of us who agree with the statement should not seek solace in polls. Those who disagree with us control the narrative and hold the purse strings.

Last edited 1 year ago by Mark Gilmour
ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago

It was obvious from the start that lockdown was a huge leap into the unknown, with immense consequences for the economy and for society. The government was fully aware of that, because their own studies, drawn up in 2011 said exactly that, in terms anyone could understand.

It was also a matter of record that we had weathered serious pandemics such as the 1960s Hong Kong Flu without doing any such thing.

It was a matter of record that we had had considerable success in excluding the early-2000s SARS/Bird Flu by restricting travel from areas known to be foci of infection.

There were SO MANY things in the public domain …..

Phil Hannay
Phil Hannay
1 year ago

I am surprised by your comments “I feel no anger, simply a wariness:…” maybe a lack of anger is part of the problem.
Personally I still feel very angry. However attractive the “It was something new and unknown” “We needed to safeguard the NHS” narrative is, I don’t think the facts support such a benign – “everyone did they best they could, but with hindsight we should have done things differently tone”.
There are so many actions taken (or not taken) that just don’t fit:
Why did governments throw out their pandemic plans to go down a lets make it up as we go along approach?Why were medical practitioners stopped from prescribing or recommending medicines at early stages of illness to reduce the risk of hospitalisation?Why did the NHS issue guidance that those in intensive care should be given medicine that are likely to have killed them?Why wasn’t more done to protect the retirement homes? Why haven’t the authorities recommended people take Vitamin D supplements?Why were vaccines recommended to younger, healthy people when it was clear they were not at risk?
The other narrative that “Excess Mortality was caused by lockdowns” also doesn’t seem to hold up to scrutiny, it is so important that we remain fact / evidence based. This (admitedly pre-print and therefore not peer reviewed) study is pointing the finger elsewhere – Is there a Link between the 2021 COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake in Europe and 2022 Excess All-Cause Mortality?[v1] | Preprints

Dominic English
Dominic English
1 year ago

We moan constantly about the government, but demand it controls more and more aspects of our lives. Weird. Here are some thoughts https://open.substack.com/pub/lowstatus/p/the-government-is-rubbish-more-please?r=evzeq&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

John Snowball
John Snowball
1 year ago

Sadly, the enthusiasm for lockdown demonstrates what complete wimps a large part of the British population has become. Whatever has happened to that country that fought alone?
A major part of the problem was the cheer-leading of the media for lockdown, and the spinelessness of the politicians, – none of whom had the courage to call it out for what it was, and were primarily concerned with covering their rear ends.

Sam Agnew
Sam Agnew
1 year ago

I know the author is quite set on his minority position but perhaps he could give some credit to those a little more charitable in their retrospective evaluation.
Does he really think that the majority of people don’t know that the impact of lockdown was not wholly good and perhaps worse than not doing it? Is he proposing we take the advice from a time traveller the next time a catastrophe comes along?
A much more reasonable explanation is that people are much more reasonable than he supposes. They perhaps recall that at the beginning no one knew how deadly this virus would be. And no one knew clearly even what medical treatments would work best. And then a few months in we learned both that people without symptoms could spread it and that the virus mutated well and successfully. The author may have forgotten (though most reasonable people remember) that for most of the “lockdown” time it was still unclear whether a vaccine would even be possible.
So, perhaps less of, “if only the sheeple knew the data” talk. Pretty arrogant and not very generous. And if all one has “learned” over the last three years is not to trust central voices but only your “bubble” of “trusted non-mainstream sources” then good luck to the whole “defending democracy and liberal society” project that the author seems so passionate about.

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Sam Agnew

Completely disagree.
They knew early on that the virus would not affect 99% of the population, and Chris Whitty even went on TV to say this.
Furthermore, a few months into, they really did know who the virus targeted, namely the elderly, the obese, and those with compromised immune systems.
I could almost agree with your statement if it had been 1 lockdown at the beginning, but it wasn’t, and the longer this all went on, the more collateral damage would occur, and the worst part is that they knew very well that the casualties, whether societal or economical, at the end would be immense, and certainly dwarf Covid deaths.
If this had happened 20 years ago, there would never have been any lockdowns because it simply would not have been possibly to shove everyone online, which meant that people would have taken individual precautions, listened to common sense advice from the Government, and gotten on with their lives.
People would have died (just like the Hong Kong Flu) but society and the economy would not have been ripped to shreds.
They locked down because they could, they wanted to see how far they could go, and because many in the population were more than happy to sit on their ar…..se at home and get paid to do nothing.

Last edited 1 year ago by Louise Durnford
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

How I disliked the tedious little Malter Whitty… the most ghastly creature.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

How I disliked the tedious little Malter Whitty… the most ghastly creature.

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Sam Agnew

Completely disagree.
They knew early on that the virus would not affect 99% of the population, and Chris Whitty even went on TV to say this.
Furthermore, a few months into, they really did know who the virus targeted, namely the elderly, the obese, and those with compromised immune systems.
I could almost agree with your statement if it had been 1 lockdown at the beginning, but it wasn’t, and the longer this all went on, the more collateral damage would occur, and the worst part is that they knew very well that the casualties, whether societal or economical, at the end would be immense, and certainly dwarf Covid deaths.
If this had happened 20 years ago, there would never have been any lockdowns because it simply would not have been possibly to shove everyone online, which meant that people would have taken individual precautions, listened to common sense advice from the Government, and gotten on with their lives.
People would have died (just like the Hong Kong Flu) but society and the economy would not have been ripped to shreds.
They locked down because they could, they wanted to see how far they could go, and because many in the population were more than happy to sit on their ar…..se at home and get paid to do nothing.

Last edited 1 year ago by Louise Durnford
Sam Agnew
Sam Agnew
1 year ago

I know the author is quite set on his minority position but perhaps he could give some credit to those a little more charitable in their retrospective evaluation.
Does he really think that the majority of people don’t know that the impact of lockdown was not wholly good and perhaps worse than not doing it? Is he proposing we take the advice from a time traveller the next time a catastrophe comes along?
A much more reasonable explanation is that people are much more reasonable than he supposes. They perhaps recall that at the beginning no one knew how deadly this virus would be. And no one knew clearly even what medical treatments would work best. And then a few months in we learned both that people without symptoms could spread it and that the virus mutated well and successfully. The author may have forgotten (though most reasonable people remember) that for most of the “lockdown” time it was still unclear whether a vaccine would even be possible.
So, perhaps less of, “if only the sheeple knew the data” talk. Pretty arrogant and not very generous. And if all one has “learned” over the last three years is not to trust central voices but only your “bubble” of “trusted non-mainstream sources” then good luck to the whole “defending democracy and liberal society” project that the author seems so passionate about.

glyn harries
glyn harries
1 year ago

The first lockdown made absolute sense, even with hindsight. We were facing a novel virus that killed significant numbers of people, quickly, including doctors and nurses, horribly. We then rightly prioritised vaccination of vulnerable people, and the wider community to achieve a form of herd immunity without the high numbers of deaths there would have been without vaccination.
You are right though that currently excess deaths is what should be used to judge responses, but fail to mention that 13 years of disastrous cuts to NHS funding has affected that dramatically. And the failure to prepare properly for pandemics, due to those cuts, and the disastrous decsion to protect old peoples homes.
And you also fail to note that pressure on the NHS, leading to excess deaths were not caused by lockdowns but by Covid itself wherin in periods of high infection very large numbers of NHS staff were off sick. It has been said that many of these people were not massively infectious, but in a medical situation no chances could have been taken so they had to be kept out of the workplace.
And to repeat. The excess deaths have been caused by the trashing the NHS has had both from the Tory government and by sickness, from Covid, levels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-64209221
So yes there were large numbers of very negative knock on affects of lockdowns but without them we would have not got the breatihng room needed to roll out the massively sucessful vaccination programme. Want to stop excess deaths? Pay NHS staff better and recruit more, many more!
Good to see excess deaths have for now dropped down again.
p.s. main cause of excess deaths? Heart disease. We need more parademics. https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiYmUwNmFhMjYtNGZhYS00NDk2LWFlMTAtOTg0OGNhNmFiNGM0IiwidCI6ImVlNGUxNDk5LTRhMzUtNGIyZS1hZDQ3LTVmM2NmOWRlODY2NiIsImMiOjh9

Last edited 1 year ago by glyn harries
glyn harries
glyn harries
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

“Severe ambulance delays, inaccessible care and ever-growing waiting lists are contributing to heart patients dying needlessly, our new analysis warns.”
https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/news-from-the-bhf/news-archive/2022/november/extreme-heart-care-disruption-linked-to-excess-deaths-involving-heart-disease

Edward Seymour
Edward Seymour
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

Cuts? To the NHS? If only someone dared. Glyn the thing is a money pit, and not one single country on earth copies it.

Last edited 1 year ago by Edward Seymour
Edward Seymour
Edward Seymour
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

Cuts? To the NHS? If only someone dared. Glyn the thing is a money pit, and not one single country on earth copies it.

Last edited 1 year ago by Edward Seymour
JOHN KANEFSKY
JOHN KANEFSKY
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

“13 years of disastrous cuts to NHS funding”
A myth, or if you prefer an untruth.
NHS funding has actually incresed steadily in real terms throughout the period.
The NHS budget and how it has changed | The King’s Fund (kingsfund.org.uk)
It could be argued that it should have increased more or faster, but that’s a different analysis.
It could also be argued that too much has been and is being spent on non-clinical purtposes, but again that’s a different issue.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

How did so many of us know that fatality estimates were ridiculously overblown. By following the logic. Diamond Princess and small carnival town in Germany. It was well ventilated on this site early on. The populations that were at risk are generally quite unhealthy.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lesley van Reenen
glyn harries
glyn harries
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

“Severe ambulance delays, inaccessible care and ever-growing waiting lists are contributing to heart patients dying needlessly, our new analysis warns.”
https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/news-from-the-bhf/news-archive/2022/november/extreme-heart-care-disruption-linked-to-excess-deaths-involving-heart-disease

JOHN KANEFSKY
JOHN KANEFSKY
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

“13 years of disastrous cuts to NHS funding”
A myth, or if you prefer an untruth.
NHS funding has actually incresed steadily in real terms throughout the period.
The NHS budget and how it has changed | The King’s Fund (kingsfund.org.uk)
It could be argued that it should have increased more or faster, but that’s a different analysis.
It could also be argued that too much has been and is being spent on non-clinical purtposes, but again that’s a different issue.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  glyn harries

How did so many of us know that fatality estimates were ridiculously overblown. By following the logic. Diamond Princess and small carnival town in Germany. It was well ventilated on this site early on. The populations that were at risk are generally quite unhealthy.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lesley van Reenen
glyn harries
glyn harries
1 year ago

The first lockdown made absolute sense, even with hindsight. We were facing a novel virus that killed significant numbers of people, quickly, including doctors and nurses, horribly. We then rightly prioritised vaccination of vulnerable people, and the wider community to achieve a form of herd immunity without the high numbers of deaths there would have been without vaccination.
You are right though that currently excess deaths is what should be used to judge responses, but fail to mention that 13 years of disastrous cuts to NHS funding has affected that dramatically. And the failure to prepare properly for pandemics, due to those cuts, and the disastrous decsion to protect old peoples homes.
And you also fail to note that pressure on the NHS, leading to excess deaths were not caused by lockdowns but by Covid itself wherin in periods of high infection very large numbers of NHS staff were off sick. It has been said that many of these people were not massively infectious, but in a medical situation no chances could have been taken so they had to be kept out of the workplace.
And to repeat. The excess deaths have been caused by the trashing the NHS has had both from the Tory government and by sickness, from Covid, levels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-64209221
So yes there were large numbers of very negative knock on affects of lockdowns but without them we would have not got the breatihng room needed to roll out the massively sucessful vaccination programme. Want to stop excess deaths? Pay NHS staff better and recruit more, many more!
Good to see excess deaths have for now dropped down again.
p.s. main cause of excess deaths? Heart disease. We need more parademics. https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiYmUwNmFhMjYtNGZhYS00NDk2LWFlMTAtOTg0OGNhNmFiNGM0IiwidCI6ImVlNGUxNDk5LTRhMzUtNGIyZS1hZDQ3LTVmM2NmOWRlODY2NiIsImMiOjh9

Last edited 1 year ago by glyn harries
Graff von Frankenheim
Graff von Frankenheim
1 year ago

These surveys never ask the questions in the right way. I wager that the following question was not put to the test population: “The scientific consensus overwhelmingly supports the view that lockdowns, face masks, test & trace, quarantining, social distancing, school closures etc made no difference whatsoever in the public health outcome during Covid-19, that the politicians, civil servants, expert government advisors who pushed for all this were deceiving the public and that the negative consequences of all these measures are disastrous for the country. Given all this, are you still persuaded that these were ….etc?”

Brendan O'Leary
Brendan O'Leary
1 year ago

Tldr.

How about this: What, in your opinion, is causing the current “cost of living crisis”?
What crisis?
Lockdowns 2020-2022
War in Ukraine
Brexit
Trump
Biden
Greedy capitalists
Evil Tories
Net zero
I doubt lockdown would even make the top three , but it’s my #1.
(So much for Unherd’s formatting options!)

Last edited 1 year ago by Brendan O'Leary
Brendan O'Leary
Brendan O'Leary
1 year ago

Tldr.

How about this: What, in your opinion, is causing the current “cost of living crisis”?
What crisis?
Lockdowns 2020-2022
War in Ukraine
Brexit
Trump
Biden
Greedy capitalists
Evil Tories
Net zero
I doubt lockdown would even make the top three , but it’s my #1.
(So much for Unherd’s formatting options!)

Last edited 1 year ago by Brendan O'Leary
Graff von Frankenheim
Graff von Frankenheim
1 year ago

These surveys never ask the questions in the right way. I wager that the following question was not put to the test population: “The scientific consensus overwhelmingly supports the view that lockdowns, face masks, test & trace, quarantining, social distancing, school closures etc made no difference whatsoever in the public health outcome during Covid-19, that the politicians, civil servants, expert government advisors who pushed for all this were deceiving the public and that the negative consequences of all these measures are disastrous for the country. Given all this, are you still persuaded that these were ….etc?”

William Edward Henry Appleby
William Edward Henry Appleby
1 year ago

In the early days of the virus, before its potential effects and likely victims were fully known, keeping people apart was the only way of attempting to spread the disease; unfortunately, implementing lockdown is another matter entirely. In my opinion more effort should have been made to isolate the most at-risk groups: the elderly, the sick, those with compromised immune systems (and to update that to include new vulnerabilities once known, for example the overweight and obese). The rest of us could then have gone about our business, accepting the risks. The vaccine also helped, although I’m fully dosed and still had covid 3 times, before and after vaccination, with no issues.

William Edward Henry Appleby
William Edward Henry Appleby
1 year ago

In the early days of the virus, before its potential effects and likely victims were fully known, keeping people apart was the only way of attempting to spread the disease; unfortunately, implementing lockdown is another matter entirely. In my opinion more effort should have been made to isolate the most at-risk groups: the elderly, the sick, those with compromised immune systems (and to update that to include new vulnerabilities once known, for example the overweight and obese). The rest of us could then have gone about our business, accepting the risks. The vaccine also helped, although I’m fully dosed and still had covid 3 times, before and after vaccination, with no issues.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Interesting that the people in the media who argue against lockdowns, and use selective data that favours their argument, are always people who were nowhere near any front lines, never in real danger themselves, and would have still expected others to take the risks.

I’ve yet to see any credible alternative proposed to any restrictions that would have mitigated those risks.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Spoken like a true Commissar.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

I can’t pretend to understand what you mean with this comment but in the real world my nephew and his wife worked in a hospital and my niece was a teacher in March 2020. If you, or Freddie Sayers, have a comprehensive, credible strategy as an alternative to lockdown at that time with the accompanying proof that they, and by extension their families, would have been able to do their jobs safely then, great, I’d love to see it.

tom j
tom j
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

It’s cost/benefit John. Your nephew and his wife’s safety is important, but so a million other things like socialisation, the economy etc. We over-reacted badly to Covid, partly because we overestimated how dangerous it was to young people, partly because we seem to have lost the sense that there are dangers in the world that we need to just live with.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

OK, then provide me with the cost/benefit analysis. A working alternative that could have been implemented at the time, and some evidence it would have worked. Show me some detail and joined up thinking to convince me that lockdown wasn’t the least worst option.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

OK, then provide me with the cost/benefit analysis. A working alternative that could have been implemented at the time, and some evidence it would have worked. Show me some detail and joined up thinking to convince me that lockdown wasn’t the least worst option.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Nihil facere.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

So by definition your views are not impartial, precisely because your family worked in hospitals: QED

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

If you lived through this, as we all did, then no one can possibly have impartial views. Sorry, but this is a ridiculous comment.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Not quite in the same league as your ridiculous contradiction of yourself. There is a reason why juries have to be impartial.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Not quite in the same league as your ridiculous contradiction of yourself. There is a reason why juries have to be impartial.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

If you lived through this, as we all did, then no one can possibly have impartial views. Sorry, but this is a ridiculous comment.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

We hear frequently from the sceptics about ‘targetted lockdowns of the vulnerable’ and so forth, which at a high level sounds reasonable. The reality however is it’s unworkable, unfair, hugely complex and confusing, which is why no one did it.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

But it’s what was in every single credible pandemic preparedness plan in western countries up to 2019, with lockdown utterly rejected.
So clearly it’s not “unworkable, unfair, hugely complex and confusing”

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

“unworkable, unfair, hugely complex and confusing”
Some examples and data :

If you were going to really protect care home residents you would have had to ensure that all their carers and any visitors didn’t meet anyone else – that is that the care homes and their staff were kept in their own bubbles (not mixing with their families) until all the elderly inmates were vaccinated.
1.49 million people in the UK are in receipt of adult social care (private and NHS and Local authority and direct payment recipients). According to Satista about 490,000 of these are in care homes. There are 1.52 million social care workers (potential transmitters to this vulnerable population). This doesn’t include those that are being cared for by immediate family members about 13.6 million informal carers according to this paper :
COVID-19 and UK family carers: policy implications
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215036621002066#!
In addition.
The population at risk of severe COVID-19 (aged ≥70 years, or with an underlying health condition with a fully adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of getting severe covid of 1.13 or greater) comprises 18.5 million individuals in the UK, including a considerable proportion of school-aged and working-aged individuals.
34% of households in the UK are multigenerational – 9 million homes.
According to the Actuaries Friday report # 51 : Priority Groups 1 to 9 i.e. over 50s, Health & Care Staff, Extremely Clinically Vulnerable and “At Risk” amounts to around 31m people.
Big numbers requiring lots of financial and logistical support in a Great Barrington Declaration scenario + a massive sacrifice by direct care workers unless you chose to bribe them with what ? an average junior doctor’s salary perhaps for 1 year ? (Foundation year doctor year 2 £33,345) x 1.52 million care workers = aproximately £ 50 – 51 billion.
So that just leaves the ? millions who are still clinically vulnerable but still working and contributing to the economy and under the GBD recipe would be obliged to continue since they are not in a care home.
So what’s YOUR plan Stuart B ?

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

“unworkable, unfair, hugely complex and confusing”
Some examples and data :

If you were going to really protect care home residents you would have had to ensure that all their carers and any visitors didn’t meet anyone else – that is that the care homes and their staff were kept in their own bubbles (not mixing with their families) until all the elderly inmates were vaccinated.
1.49 million people in the UK are in receipt of adult social care (private and NHS and Local authority and direct payment recipients). According to Satista about 490,000 of these are in care homes. There are 1.52 million social care workers (potential transmitters to this vulnerable population). This doesn’t include those that are being cared for by immediate family members about 13.6 million informal carers according to this paper :
COVID-19 and UK family carers: policy implications
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215036621002066#!
In addition.
The population at risk of severe COVID-19 (aged ≥70 years, or with an underlying health condition with a fully adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of getting severe covid of 1.13 or greater) comprises 18.5 million individuals in the UK, including a considerable proportion of school-aged and working-aged individuals.
34% of households in the UK are multigenerational – 9 million homes.
According to the Actuaries Friday report # 51 : Priority Groups 1 to 9 i.e. over 50s, Health & Care Staff, Extremely Clinically Vulnerable and “At Risk” amounts to around 31m people.
Big numbers requiring lots of financial and logistical support in a Great Barrington Declaration scenario + a massive sacrifice by direct care workers unless you chose to bribe them with what ? an average junior doctor’s salary perhaps for 1 year ? (Foundation year doctor year 2 £33,345) x 1.52 million care workers = aproximately £ 50 – 51 billion.
So that just leaves the ? millions who are still clinically vulnerable but still working and contributing to the economy and under the GBD recipe would be obliged to continue since they are not in a care home.
So what’s YOUR plan Stuart B ?

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Yes, no one on the anti lockdown side of the debate can come up with a detailed comprehensive strategy that there was a credible alternative that worked have worked, and here’s the evidence.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Oh my word, the detailed, comprehensive, credible alternative strategy is laid out in minute detail in pretty much every single western democratic country’s plans for handling pandemic respiratory illness up to 2019.

All intemperately thrown away by panicked politicians and their advisors for a massive wholly discredited experiment.

Those plans were developed after decades of study and through detailed consideration.

YOU are the one who wanted to throw them away therefore the onus, scientifically, morally and politically, is on YOU to prove that those previous plans were unsuitable and your new one was better.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stuart B
John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

I don’t have to prove anything. The point of Freddie Sayers’ article was that a small minority of people feel lockdowns were wrong, while a large majority think they were necessary and proportionate. Personally, I think lockdown was the least worst option. Nothing I’ve read has convinced me otherwise but if you publish these magical plans somewhere I can access them I’m happy to take a look. Otherwise, I’ll stay with the majority.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

I’m not quite sure how I can in good faith engage with someone who regards publicly published and freely available pre-covid pandemic preparedness plans as “magical”.
They exist, they were abandoned without evidence and yet you apparently continue to repeatedly assert that they didn’t exist.
shrug…

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

I’m not saying they didn’t exist just asking for how to access these papers which will somehow ‘prove’ that lockdown wasn’t necessary. Send me a link or whatever and I’ll have a look.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

You have your logic wrong. Nobody can (or needs to) “prove” that lockdown wasn’t necessary. But we had evidence and research-backed plans that did not advocate it (and indeed contradicted it), it’s up to you to prove that those plans were rightly abandoned.
Google is your friend, and I might suppose that since you seem so certain you might have made some effort, but nevertheless here you go…
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/responding-to-a-uk-flu-pandemic

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

Seriously? This is the best you’ve got? You read these and have the qualifications, experience and expertise to definitively say that if we’d followed this we wouldn’t have needed a lockdown and have achieved a better result. Pretty heroic stretch!

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

The assumptions in this document are all based on an influenza pandemic not SARS, MERS or Sars Cov 2. Different transmssion dynamics, very different clinical progression, different morbidities, initially no effective antivirals, initially no vaccine.
Not very helpful.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

Seriously? This is the best you’ve got? You read these and have the qualifications, experience and expertise to definitively say that if we’d followed this we wouldn’t have needed a lockdown and have achieved a better result. Pretty heroic stretch!

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

The assumptions in this document are all based on an influenza pandemic not SARS, MERS or Sars Cov 2. Different transmssion dynamics, very different clinical progression, different morbidities, initially no effective antivirals, initially no vaccine.
Not very helpful.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

You have your logic wrong. Nobody can (or needs to) “prove” that lockdown wasn’t necessary. But we had evidence and research-backed plans that did not advocate it (and indeed contradicted it), it’s up to you to prove that those plans were rightly abandoned.
Google is your friend, and I might suppose that since you seem so certain you might have made some effort, but nevertheless here you go…
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/responding-to-a-uk-flu-pandemic

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

I’m not saying they didn’t exist just asking for how to access these papers which will somehow ‘prove’ that lockdown wasn’t necessary. Send me a link or whatever and I’ll have a look.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Great Barrington declaration. Sweden. The majority of people are erm…. mediocre and don’t think critically. Then another crowd are corrupt and opportunistic.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

The GBD was an impractical option in the UK because of the sheer numbers of vulnerable individuals.
According to the Actuaries (you know, those people who deal with death and destruction and risk management every day of the week) there were about 39 million of them.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago

So half the country were vulnerable? That is a shocking indictment on the general health of those in the UK. Anyway that is a different discussion – we know that a huge percentage of the population are overweight or obese.
This does not change the fact that the other half of the country should not have been locked down. Your solution offered up the future of the children and youth and the healthy at the altar of the old and unhealthy – a lot of these people abuse lifestyle guidelines.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lesley van Reenen
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

There are 11 million people > 65 years of age in the UK. Simple maths tells us therefore, that 28 million fall into the category of < 65 years of age (and therefore potentially economically active) and in the Actuaries “Vulnerable” category.
You are absolutely correct. The UK is an old, sick country.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

There are 11 million people > 65 years of age in the UK. Simple maths tells us therefore, that 28 million fall into the category of < 65 years of age (and therefore potentially economically active) and in the Actuaries “Vulnerable” category.
You are absolutely correct. The UK is an old, sick country.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago

So half the country were vulnerable? That is a shocking indictment on the general health of those in the UK. Anyway that is a different discussion – we know that a huge percentage of the population are overweight or obese.
This does not change the fact that the other half of the country should not have been locked down. Your solution offered up the future of the children and youth and the healthy at the altar of the old and unhealthy – a lot of these people abuse lifestyle guidelines.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lesley van Reenen
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

The GBD was an impractical option in the UK because of the sheer numbers of vulnerable individuals.
According to the Actuaries (you know, those people who deal with death and destruction and risk management every day of the week) there were about 39 million of them.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

I’m not quite sure how I can in good faith engage with someone who regards publicly published and freely available pre-covid pandemic preparedness plans as “magical”.
They exist, they were abandoned without evidence and yet you apparently continue to repeatedly assert that they didn’t exist.
shrug…

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Great Barrington declaration. Sweden. The majority of people are erm…. mediocre and don’t think critically. Then another crowd are corrupt and opportunistic.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

I don’t have to prove anything. The point of Freddie Sayers’ article was that a small minority of people feel lockdowns were wrong, while a large majority think they were necessary and proportionate. Personally, I think lockdown was the least worst option. Nothing I’ve read has convinced me otherwise but if you publish these magical plans somewhere I can access them I’m happy to take a look. Otherwise, I’ll stay with the majority.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

BoJo had one. See above.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Oh my word, the detailed, comprehensive, credible alternative strategy is laid out in minute detail in pretty much every single western democratic country’s plans for handling pandemic respiratory illness up to 2019.

All intemperately thrown away by panicked politicians and their advisors for a massive wholly discredited experiment.

Those plans were developed after decades of study and through detailed consideration.

YOU are the one who wanted to throw them away therefore the onus, scientifically, morally and politically, is on YOU to prove that those previous plans were unsuitable and your new one was better.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stuart B
Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

BoJo had one. See above.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

“Targeted lockdowns” sounds like an infringement of rights of the obese, elderly, immunocompromised etc They could be given the state of the art information on their risks, but also given the power of discretion as to which measures they found acceptable, on an individual basis. Each to his own risk/benefit calculus.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

But it’s what was in every single credible pandemic preparedness plan in western countries up to 2019, with lockdown utterly rejected.
So clearly it’s not “unworkable, unfair, hugely complex and confusing”

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Yes, no one on the anti lockdown side of the debate can come up with a detailed comprehensive strategy that there was a credible alternative that worked have worked, and here’s the evidence.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

“Targeted lockdowns” sounds like an infringement of rights of the obese, elderly, immunocompromised etc They could be given the state of the art information on their risks, but also given the power of discretion as to which measures they found acceptable, on an individual basis. Each to his own risk/benefit calculus.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

There was no need of “proof of safety” to keep working at the hospital during China flu, or teaching kids at the school.

It’s the other way around: I should think first you’d need evidence of danger in order to consider suspending these operations, and even then evidence that such a restriction was even effective. There never was any.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

As I said in my original post provide me with evidence that there was a better option at the time. I have seen nothing to convince me that lockdown wasn’t the least worst option but if you have something detailed and credible I’d love to see it.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

There is no need for such evidence. There was no need to search for a “better option,” a “least worst option,” or anything else.

I am sorry to put it so bluntly but that is delusional, hysterical thinking. Beware asking leaders to “do” something, anything, especially in a state of panic.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

Do I think lockdown was particularly well managed? No. But I don’t see the lockdown sceptics giving me a better option. We all lived through COVID, and people died, the economy suffered, education suffered etc. So would the situation have been better with no lockdown? I’m not convinced. Bombast about ‘hysterical’ ‘delusional’ thinking isn’t going to change my mind.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

You are sounding increasingly desperate imo

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Desperate about what exactly?

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Defending the indefensible and not making a particularly good job of the debate.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Defending the indefensible and not making a particularly good job of the debate.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Desperate about what exactly?

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

You are sounding increasingly desperate imo

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

There is always need for evidence. It’s part of the critical thinking process.
Unless of course you are happy just going with religious belief.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago

No, I believe you have misunderstood: I am sure you will agree there is no need to produce evidence in response to every silly plea or demand.

Specifically there is no need to provide evidence for supposed “alternative solutions” to a problem that isn’t really there in the first place.

My point is precisely that evidence guides us: lacking evidence of grave danger, there was no need to mandate “solutions,” which themselves lacked any evidence of effectiveness. Especially when those so-called “least worst options” curtailed our freedoms and brought economic activity, not to mention social and spiritual activity, and of course regular healthful activity in general, to a halt.

I can’t speak for all religious, but indeed Christians “walk by faith, and not by sight.” However proper apprehension of reality as far as the novel glorified f!u was hardly limited to religious people.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

“I am sure you will agree there is no need to produce evidence in response to every silly plea or demand”
No, I don’t agree. Providing evidence / reasons for a conjecture / assumption / contention is the basis for all civilised discourse for me.
“proper apprehension of reality”
Depends on where you are. Reality in Bergamo Italy in early 2020 was very different from the reality say in the middle of a wheatfield in Kansas in the same time frame.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

Let me re-word – ‘no need to produce evidence in response to every LAZY, silly plea or demand.’

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

“I am sure you will agree there is no need to produce evidence in response to every silly plea or demand”
No, I don’t agree. Providing evidence / reasons for a conjecture / assumption / contention is the basis for all civilised discourse for me.
“proper apprehension of reality”
Depends on where you are. Reality in Bergamo Italy in early 2020 was very different from the reality say in the middle of a wheatfield in Kansas in the same time frame.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

Let me re-word – ‘no need to produce evidence in response to every LAZY, silly plea or demand.’

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago

No, I believe you have misunderstood: I am sure you will agree there is no need to produce evidence in response to every silly plea or demand.

Specifically there is no need to provide evidence for supposed “alternative solutions” to a problem that isn’t really there in the first place.

My point is precisely that evidence guides us: lacking evidence of grave danger, there was no need to mandate “solutions,” which themselves lacked any evidence of effectiveness. Especially when those so-called “least worst options” curtailed our freedoms and brought economic activity, not to mention social and spiritual activity, and of course regular healthful activity in general, to a halt.

I can’t speak for all religious, but indeed Christians “walk by faith, and not by sight.” However proper apprehension of reality as far as the novel glorified f!u was hardly limited to religious people.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

Do I think lockdown was particularly well managed? No. But I don’t see the lockdown sceptics giving me a better option. We all lived through COVID, and people died, the economy suffered, education suffered etc. So would the situation have been better with no lockdown? I’m not convinced. Bombast about ‘hysterical’ ‘delusional’ thinking isn’t going to change my mind.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

There is always need for evidence. It’s part of the critical thinking process.
Unless of course you are happy just going with religious belief.

Paul Nash
Paul Nash
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

John you’re wasting your time. My friend whom I’ve known for forty years and never had a cross word with, has literally lost his mind over COVID. You can’t have a conversation without him becoming totally irrational. And it seems many of the commenters here are the same.

Juliet Boddington
Juliet Boddington
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Dr John Campbell on Youtube is a voice of reason. He looks at the Government and World’s official statistics – nothing made up or guessed at – and provides the credible evidence you desire. Or do you?

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

There is no need for such evidence. There was no need to search for a “better option,” a “least worst option,” or anything else.

I am sorry to put it so bluntly but that is delusional, hysterical thinking. Beware asking leaders to “do” something, anything, especially in a state of panic.

Paul Nash
Paul Nash
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

John you’re wasting your time. My friend whom I’ve known for forty years and never had a cross word with, has literally lost his mind over COVID. You can’t have a conversation without him becoming totally irrational. And it seems many of the commenters here are the same.

Juliet Boddington
Juliet Boddington
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Dr John Campbell on Youtube is a voice of reason. He looks at the Government and World’s official statistics – nothing made up or guessed at – and provides the credible evidence you desire. Or do you?

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

As I said in my original post provide me with evidence that there was a better option at the time. I have seen nothing to convince me that lockdown wasn’t the least worst option but if you have something detailed and credible I’d love to see it.

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

The credible alternative response would have been Sweden’s highly successful strategy.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Jane H

The same strategy that has resulted in about 500% more covid deaths than Norway?

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Jane H

Do you have any detailed analysis of how Sweden’s strategy would have worked in the UK or evidence that it would be successful?just saying ‘Sweden’ doesn’t really cut it.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Jane H

The same strategy that has resulted in about 500% more covid deaths than Norway?

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Jane H

Do you have any detailed analysis of how Sweden’s strategy would have worked in the UK or evidence that it would be successful?just saying ‘Sweden’ doesn’t really cut it.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Even Boris had a better plan originally. Shield the elderly and those with co-morbidities. The majority or the press and the public shouted him down.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Which comes back to the point I keep making; do you have any evidence, real evidence, that if we’d followed the original plan we would have achieved a better result? If so, what is it?

Juliet Boddington
Juliet Boddington
1 year ago

Yes, there was a plan in place should a pandemic arise – evidently a likely occurance. It had been worked on and updated for the previous 16 years. So why didn’t the government adhere to it?

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

Because it was designed for an influenza virus not a coronavirus that kept sick people in hospital for much longer and for which we had no vaccine, initially.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Still waiting for a real vaccine, actually, but not standing on one leg. A coronavirus can mutate in <24 hours. Not a likely candidate for a vaccine. And mRNA is proving to be possibly riskier than the Covid. Speaking of actuarials, and projections, why would one volunteer to take an essentially (less than 10 years on the market) untested genetic therapy in the hopes of ameliorating an illness with a mortality of less than 1%? (And according to NHS statistics, in 2020, the majority of that 1% had a life expectancy of less than 18 months anyway) Those numbers, and enough medical reading to know that sequestration trashes the immune system, led some of us to conclude the lockdown/vaccine/silly mask route was an offer we could safely refuse.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  E. L. Herndon

According to the Actuaries (you know those people who deal with death and destruction every day) life expectancy for an 80 – 89 year old with 2 comorbidites at the begining of 2020 was at least 5 years.
If you have got as far as your 80s you are one of the “toughies”
What sequestration ?

Last edited 1 year ago by Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  E. L. Herndon

According to the Actuaries (you know those people who deal with death and destruction every day) life expectancy for an 80 – 89 year old with 2 comorbidites at the begining of 2020 was at least 5 years.
If you have got as far as your 80s you are one of the “toughies”
What sequestration ?

Last edited 1 year ago by Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago

But we had death rates early on from the Diamond Princess (lots of old people, not so?) and small carnival town in Germany. Ferguson et al were as usual blowing smoke.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7118348/
“Using the age distribution of cases and deaths on the ship [1,2] to estimate for only individuals 70 years and older, the cIFR was 6.4% (95% CI: 2.6–13) and the cCFR was 13% (95% CI: 5.2–26)”
Either 9 or 13 people died as a result of the DP event, depending on which paper you read. Age range 60s – 87. No comorbidities noted because of incomplete record keeping….yes, even the Japanese were panicking at that point.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7118348/
“Using the age distribution of cases and deaths on the ship [1,2] to estimate for only individuals 70 years and older, the cIFR was 6.4% (95% CI: 2.6–13) and the cCFR was 13% (95% CI: 5.2–26)”
Either 9 or 13 people died as a result of the DP event, depending on which paper you read. Age range 60s – 87. No comorbidities noted because of incomplete record keeping….yes, even the Japanese were panicking at that point.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Still waiting for a real vaccine, actually, but not standing on one leg. A coronavirus can mutate in <24 hours. Not a likely candidate for a vaccine. And mRNA is proving to be possibly riskier than the Covid. Speaking of actuarials, and projections, why would one volunteer to take an essentially (less than 10 years on the market) untested genetic therapy in the hopes of ameliorating an illness with a mortality of less than 1%? (And according to NHS statistics, in 2020, the majority of that 1% had a life expectancy of less than 18 months anyway) Those numbers, and enough medical reading to know that sequestration trashes the immune system, led some of us to conclude the lockdown/vaccine/silly mask route was an offer we could safely refuse.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago

But we had death rates early on from the Diamond Princess (lots of old people, not so?) and small carnival town in Germany. Ferguson et al were as usual blowing smoke.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

Because it was designed for an influenza virus not a coronavirus that kept sick people in hospital for much longer and for which we had no vaccine, initially.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Which comes back to the point I keep making; do you have any evidence, real evidence, that if we’d followed the original plan we would have achieved a better result? If so, what is it?

Juliet Boddington
Juliet Boddington
1 year ago

Yes, there was a plan in place should a pandemic arise – evidently a likely occurance. It had been worked on and updated for the previous 16 years. So why didn’t the government adhere to it?

tom j
tom j
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

It’s cost/benefit John. Your nephew and his wife’s safety is important, but so a million other things like socialisation, the economy etc. We over-reacted badly to Covid, partly because we overestimated how dangerous it was to young people, partly because we seem to have lost the sense that there are dangers in the world that we need to just live with.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Nihil facere.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

So by definition your views are not impartial, precisely because your family worked in hospitals: QED

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

We hear frequently from the sceptics about ‘targetted lockdowns of the vulnerable’ and so forth, which at a high level sounds reasonable. The reality however is it’s unworkable, unfair, hugely complex and confusing, which is why no one did it.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

There was no need of “proof of safety” to keep working at the hospital during China flu, or teaching kids at the school.

It’s the other way around: I should think first you’d need evidence of danger in order to consider suspending these operations, and even then evidence that such a restriction was even effective. There never was any.

Jane H
Jane H
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

The credible alternative response would have been Sweden’s highly successful strategy.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Even Boris had a better plan originally. Shield the elderly and those with co-morbidities. The majority or the press and the public shouted him down.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

I can’t pretend to understand what you mean with this comment but in the real world my nephew and his wife worked in a hospital and my niece was a teacher in March 2020. If you, or Freddie Sayers, have a comprehensive, credible strategy as an alternative to lockdown at that time with the accompanying proof that they, and by extension their families, would have been able to do their jobs safely then, great, I’d love to see it.

Keith Williams
Keith Williams
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Read The Great Barrington Declaration.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Keith Williams

I didn’t believe it then, I don’t believe it now. I don’t think it constitutes a credible alternative strategy to lockdown.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Keith Williams

I didn’t believe it then, I don’t believe it now. I don’t think it constitutes a credible alternative strategy to lockdown.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

What were the “front lines”? A hospital?

Wasn’t it only “dangerous” if you were obese, diabetic and over the age of 65; or if you were elderly and had cancer?

I do understand that there was a lot of extra work to do with proning massively obese patients, working in different wards than they were used to, taking and administering endless tests, and so on; but overall the young nurses I met were happy to take the extra money and opportunities for travel.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

I take it you have never worked in critical care ?
In the first wave and again in January 2021 (you know, after people ignored all the messaging and met up over Christmas and New Year) the patient : nurse ratio for critical care beds went from the recomended 1 : 1 to 6 : 1 . Not conducive to good nursing, good outcomes or general morale.
The ignorance here about what actually went on in hospitals is as deep and wide as any ocean I have ever seen.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago

No, I haven’t worked in critical care, or even been in it, and yes, I was one of those “ignoring the messaging” and frolicking the whole pandemic long. I was the lone “pure blood,” un-“vaccinated” that is, at parties throughout December 2020, where all attendees contracted the new f!u. How embarrassed so many of them were!

Actually it was remarkable how the “messaging” was so emotive, with so little facts. I guess you were moved? Look up any American press conference from around then and listen to the way those hospital leaders talk, urging “vaccination,” without citing one figure, or addressing one criticism. No, it’s all, “stay home, you’re killing people!” if you never got the shot. Ironically in the US the plea later became, “Don’t come to the ER just because you have COVID!” It seems the scare tactics worked too well! Maybe you recall this taking place.

I did meet a good many ICU nurses, and others who moved units due to the flu wreaking havoc among obese diabetics; the nurses were flush with cash and looking to have fun. The “health care heroes” nonsense was to make supporters of lockdowns feel virtuous when deep down they knew they were behaving cowardly. No one really talked like that, except maybe online, or to a gullible audience, reminiscing about the “front lines.”

Yes, I did hear of some instances of low morale, owing to certain factors; that was always a problem for hospital leadership, not a reason to mandate in society masks, shots, lockdowns and all the rest.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

Enjoy your bubble

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago

And you aren’t in a bubble? You were and are the one advocating for bubbles. The irony!

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

In terms of reducing transmission of an airborne virus bubbles don’t work very well at all as you very well know.
We know this from the amount of household transmission e.g :
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774102
and by what happened in the UK in December / January 2021 (lots of theoretical bubbling but lots of incomers from outside for Christmas and New Year).
Bingo ! critical care capacity almost but not quite overwhelmed on January 11th + the associated deaths 4 weeks – 6 months later. Fortunately for the hospital system our hard pressed health care professionals were much better at managing the disease by then and were able to boot many people out of hospital within 1 week instead of the 3 – 6 week scenario in March 2020.
If, of course you have no interest in the workings of a just in time healthcare systems then all this information is irrelevant to you.
Bubbles only work if people understand chains of transmission.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

In terms of reducing transmission of an airborne virus bubbles don’t work very well at all as you very well know.
We know this from the amount of household transmission e.g :
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774102
and by what happened in the UK in December / January 2021 (lots of theoretical bubbling but lots of incomers from outside for Christmas and New Year).
Bingo ! critical care capacity almost but not quite overwhelmed on January 11th + the associated deaths 4 weeks – 6 months later. Fortunately for the hospital system our hard pressed health care professionals were much better at managing the disease by then and were able to boot many people out of hospital within 1 week instead of the 3 – 6 week scenario in March 2020.
If, of course you have no interest in the workings of a just in time healthcare systems then all this information is irrelevant to you.
Bubbles only work if people understand chains of transmission.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago

And you aren’t in a bubble? You were and are the one advocating for bubbles. The irony!

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

Enjoy your bubble

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Have you by any chance “worked in critical care”, may I ask?

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago

No, I haven’t worked in critical care, or even been in it, and yes, I was one of those “ignoring the messaging” and frolicking the whole pandemic long. I was the lone “pure blood,” un-“vaccinated” that is, at parties throughout December 2020, where all attendees contracted the new f!u. How embarrassed so many of them were!

Actually it was remarkable how the “messaging” was so emotive, with so little facts. I guess you were moved? Look up any American press conference from around then and listen to the way those hospital leaders talk, urging “vaccination,” without citing one figure, or addressing one criticism. No, it’s all, “stay home, you’re killing people!” if you never got the shot. Ironically in the US the plea later became, “Don’t come to the ER just because you have COVID!” It seems the scare tactics worked too well! Maybe you recall this taking place.

I did meet a good many ICU nurses, and others who moved units due to the flu wreaking havoc among obese diabetics; the nurses were flush with cash and looking to have fun. The “health care heroes” nonsense was to make supporters of lockdowns feel virtuous when deep down they knew they were behaving cowardly. No one really talked like that, except maybe online, or to a gullible audience, reminiscing about the “front lines.”

Yes, I did hear of some instances of low morale, owing to certain factors; that was always a problem for hospital leadership, not a reason to mandate in society masks, shots, lockdowns and all the rest.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Have you by any chance “worked in critical care”, may I ask?

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

I take it you have never worked in critical care ?
In the first wave and again in January 2021 (you know, after people ignored all the messaging and met up over Christmas and New Year) the patient : nurse ratio for critical care beds went from the recomended 1 : 1 to 6 : 1 . Not conducive to good nursing, good outcomes or general morale.
The ignorance here about what actually went on in hospitals is as deep and wide as any ocean I have ever seen.

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Rubbish. I was teaching during the pandemic and hated that lockdown measures were preventing me from being with my students in a classroom. I took my mask off at every opportunity and actively sought out opportunities to connect with people (obviously not the loony-tunes who insisted on elbow bumps or those acting as if I was a bubonic plague carrier).
I witnessed first-hand how the credulous could be made to obey totalitarian diktats. In my experience it was those less likely to catch it who seemed the easiest to coerce. They seemed to also take a cruel delight in bashing others for not following the rules.

Last edited 1 year ago by Julian Farrows
John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

Good for you. But you lost me at ‘totalitarian diktats’.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Come off it you ridiculous old Commie! You know full well what he is talking about.
Be off with you, back to ‘Twitter’ where you belong.
You will only get ‘hurt’ if you remain here.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

I picture you as a ringer for Uncle Monty in Withnail and I, but your inability to raise your level above that of a rather dim five year old having a tantrum in the playground rather lets you down.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Surely even YOU you can do better than that?

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

While you apparently can’t…

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

I don’t have to. You have revealed yourself to be a vulgar, ill-bred moron of little worth over the last few days.

Be off with you, back to ‘Twitter’ where you so obviously belong, you ridiculous ( American/Canadian) poseur.

As I said before, you will only get ‘hurt’ if you remain here.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

I don’t have to. You have revealed yourself to be a vulgar, ill-bred moron of little worth over the last few days.

Be off with you, back to ‘Twitter’ where you so obviously belong, you ridiculous ( American/Canadian) poseur.

As I said before, you will only get ‘hurt’ if you remain here.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

While you apparently can’t…

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Surely even YOU you can do better than that?

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

I picture you as a ringer for Uncle Monty in Withnail and I, but your inability to raise your level above that of a rather dim five year old having a tantrum in the playground rather lets you down.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Come off it you ridiculous old Commie! You know full well what he is talking about.
Be off with you, back to ‘Twitter’ where you belong.
You will only get ‘hurt’ if you remain here.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

Good for you. But you lost me at ‘totalitarian diktats’.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Yet there were so few of these people in the media that you refer to. Most of the media were virtue signalling and stoking up fear 24/7. Bravo to those in the media who had the ethics to actually look intelligently and morally at the situation.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lesley van Reenen
John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

The idea that there were a few brave people telling the truth and everyone else, all of us, in the chaos of a pandemic where people were dying and hospitals in danger of being overwhelmed were way too stupid to follow the advice of those brave few, who I guess included yourself. A tad arrogant, no?

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Questioning, intelligent, logical, informed. We went looking elsewhere for information when it was patently evident that governments, the WHO (lol), corporate media and the like were not trustworthy.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

So the majority are not questioning, intelligent, logical, informed? The problem with living in an echo chamber is that you end up believing in fantasies, conspiracy theories etc. and that you, and only you, are the one true Messiah. You would really benefit from a visit to the real world, if even only occasionally.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

“fools seldom differ.”

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

“fools seldom differ.”

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

So the majority are not questioning, intelligent, logical, informed? The problem with living in an echo chamber is that you end up believing in fantasies, conspiracy theories etc. and that you, and only you, are the one true Messiah. You would really benefit from a visit to the real world, if even only occasionally.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Questioning, intelligent, logical, informed. We went looking elsewhere for information when it was patently evident that governments, the WHO (lol), corporate media and the like were not trustworthy.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

The idea that there were a few brave people telling the truth and everyone else, all of us, in the chaos of a pandemic where people were dying and hospitals in danger of being overwhelmed were way too stupid to follow the advice of those brave few, who I guess included yourself. A tad arrogant, no?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Spoken like a true Commissar.

Keith Williams
Keith Williams
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Read The Great Barrington Declaration.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

What were the “front lines”? A hospital?

Wasn’t it only “dangerous” if you were obese, diabetic and over the age of 65; or if you were elderly and had cancer?

I do understand that there was a lot of extra work to do with proning massively obese patients, working in different wards than they were used to, taking and administering endless tests, and so on; but overall the young nurses I met were happy to take the extra money and opportunities for travel.

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Rubbish. I was teaching during the pandemic and hated that lockdown measures were preventing me from being with my students in a classroom. I took my mask off at every opportunity and actively sought out opportunities to connect with people (obviously not the loony-tunes who insisted on elbow bumps or those acting as if I was a bubonic plague carrier).
I witnessed first-hand how the credulous could be made to obey totalitarian diktats. In my experience it was those less likely to catch it who seemed the easiest to coerce. They seemed to also take a cruel delight in bashing others for not following the rules.

Last edited 1 year ago by Julian Farrows
Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Yet there were so few of these people in the media that you refer to. Most of the media were virtue signalling and stoking up fear 24/7. Bravo to those in the media who had the ethics to actually look intelligently and morally at the situation.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lesley van Reenen
John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Interesting that the people in the media who argue against lockdowns, and use selective data that favours their argument, are always people who were nowhere near any front lines, never in real danger themselves, and would have still expected others to take the risks.

I’ve yet to see any credible alternative proposed to any restrictions that would have mitigated those risks.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

Perhaps because the majority of ordinary people are simply not as clever as you are?
The similarities between your concealed contempt for ordinary people and H Clinton’s “deplorables” comment are obvious, ironically. 
Are dissenting opinions allowed in your freedom loving worldview?
During the so-called lockdown (which was widely ignored), all working from home, our business took on 2 major multi-million investment rounds and won an international arbitration vs a listed company (on Zoom), our kids’ literacy improved significantly, my relationships with my kids improved, I saved a lot of money, lost weight, and I was spared the drudgery, waste of time, and expense of long commutes and head-wreck open plan offices. Fantastic period in my life. 
The reason lockdown worked was because many people preferred it to the hamster-wheel drudgery of what passes for “freedom”:
https://ayenaw.com/2021/08/31/the-road-to-freedom/
Tough for bored middle-class conspiracy theorists to accept that, of course:
https://ayenaw.com/2022/02/09/freedom-fighters/
Lockdown conspiracy theorists tend to have one thing in common – not one of you has ever experienced anything remotely resembling state oppression:
https://ayenaw.com/2021/10/23/tyranny-tourism/
Wusses

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Easy on, Frank.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

You may take the man from Belfast, but NEVER take Belfast from the man.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

You may take the man from Belfast, but NEVER take Belfast from the man.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Easy on, Frank.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

Perhaps because the majority of ordinary people are simply not as clever as you are?
The similarities between your concealed contempt for ordinary people and H Clinton’s “deplorables” comment are obvious, ironically. 
Are dissenting opinions allowed in your freedom loving worldview?
During the so-called lockdown (which was widely ignored), all working from home, our business took on 2 major multi-million investment rounds and won an international arbitration vs a listed company (on Zoom), our kids’ literacy improved significantly, my relationships with my kids improved, I saved a lot of money, lost weight, and I was spared the drudgery, waste of time, and expense of long commutes and head-wreck open plan offices. Fantastic period in my life. 
The reason lockdown worked was because many people preferred it to the hamster-wheel drudgery of what passes for “freedom”:
https://ayenaw.com/2021/08/31/the-road-to-freedom/
Tough for bored middle-class conspiracy theorists to accept that, of course:
https://ayenaw.com/2022/02/09/freedom-fighters/
Lockdown conspiracy theorists tend to have one thing in common – not one of you has ever experienced anything remotely resembling state oppression:
https://ayenaw.com/2021/10/23/tyranny-tourism/
Wusses

Gordon Arta
Gordon Arta
1 year ago

The answer is simple; the visceral opposition to lockdowns was, and is, primarily ideological, and the UK doesn’t do ideology. Not far right, far left, nor the ‘live free or die’ survivalist mentality which seems to be taking over UnHerd’s comment columns. Take this statement ‘There were periods when the evidence looked like it was going the other way, such as Sweden’s worse-than-expected second wave in winter 2020-21. Professor Fredrik Elgh dramatically predicted disaster for that country, which ultimately didn’t transpire — but he had me worried’. Worried not about the possibility of thousands of deaths, but about being proved wrong. Sumption is being lionised not for his better health or scientific expertise, but because of his fixation on idealised ‘rights’. When his supporters declare that ‘they will never again believe anything the government says’ you know that some half-arsked belief has taken over from intelligence and reason. What are you going to do, guys? Escape to the wilds of Epping Forest with a bow and arrow and a tin of beans?

Gordon Arta
Gordon Arta
1 year ago

The answer is simple; the visceral opposition to lockdowns was, and is, primarily ideological, and the UK doesn’t do ideology. Not far right, far left, nor the ‘live free or die’ survivalist mentality which seems to be taking over UnHerd’s comment columns. Take this statement ‘There were periods when the evidence looked like it was going the other way, such as Sweden’s worse-than-expected second wave in winter 2020-21. Professor Fredrik Elgh dramatically predicted disaster for that country, which ultimately didn’t transpire — but he had me worried’. Worried not about the possibility of thousands of deaths, but about being proved wrong. Sumption is being lionised not for his better health or scientific expertise, but because of his fixation on idealised ‘rights’. When his supporters declare that ‘they will never again believe anything the government says’ you know that some half-arsked belief has taken over from intelligence and reason. What are you going to do, guys? Escape to the wilds of Epping Forest with a bow and arrow and a tin of beans?

Colin Goodfellow
Colin Goodfellow
1 year ago

Perhapes people generally recognize that a great many lives were saved and misery avoided by following the best science available. And that as fun being contrarain is, its no replacment for keeping people alive and safe. Enjoy your i told you sos as you fabricate them.

zee upītis
zee upītis
1 year ago

The article literally references the excess deaths and you still keep drumming your moral high horse drum 😀

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Try using the edit function!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

The Flat Earth Society is alive and well on Unherd!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

The Flat Earth Society is alive and well on Unherd!

zee upītis
zee upītis
1 year ago

The article literally references the excess deaths and you still keep drumming your moral high horse drum 😀

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Try using the edit function!

Colin Goodfellow
Colin Goodfellow
1 year ago

Perhapes people generally recognize that a great many lives were saved and misery avoided by following the best science available. And that as fun being contrarain is, its no replacment for keeping people alive and safe. Enjoy your i told you sos as you fabricate them.

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago

Some dodgy stats on display here, Sweden had twice the death rates of its Nordic neighbours. The official Swedish covid enquiry concluded that ‘earlier and more extensive pandemic action should have been taken.’ What the lockdown did was buy us time to develop an effective vaccine, which got us off the hook. On what planet is this choosing security over freedom? Schoolboy stuff.

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

Slight problem with your post, because lockdown did not “buy” us time to develop an effective vaccine, since the vaccine is not effective at stopping transmission, or stopping infection.
The average age of those who died of Covid, rather than another respiratory disease that would most likely have taken them as well, is 83.
The vaccine did not “get us off the hook”. It gave the politicians an excuse to backtrack from a lockdown policy that they knew was going to cost everyone very dearly at the end, and did nothing to stop a virus that would just keep coming back until the population attained a percentage of herd immunity.
As for your assertion that Sweden had twice the death rates of Norway (almost all in care homes) you conveniently omit the fact that it is excess death rate figures that are more important ones, and on this, Sweden has the lowest rate, even Norway.
You really shouldn’t accuse Freddie of being a schoolboy when you don’t check the facts that he highlights.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

Transmission. Depends on the variant.
I would say there was good evidence for reduction in transmission of the alpha variant early in 2021
Effect of vaccination on household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in England. N Engl J Med2021;385:759-60. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2107717 pmid:34161702
and
Effect of vaccination on transmission of covid-19: SARS-Cov-2. N Engl J Med2021;385:1718-20. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2106757 pmid:34496200
Less efficacious against delta :
The impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on alpha and delta variant transmission.Medrxiv2021.09.28.21264260 [Preprint]. doi:10.1101/2021.09.28.21264260
Good narrative review with decent references in the BMJ here :
What do we know about covid vaccines and preventing transmission?
https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o298
These vaccines were never designed to prevent infection, only reducing the chances of you getting really sick (and bunging up hospitals). The original trials make this clear that was the case because they weren’t human challenge trials.
The vaccines have been spectacularly successful at reducing the total numbers of really sick individuals thus allowing the lean and mean NHS to get on with other work.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Your last paragraph, as I read it, is exactly the same position as those who still think that lockdown prevented a worse rate of infection. Think of the man caught throwing tissues out a train window, and asked why. “It is to keep the wild elephants away.” “But we have no wild elephants in this country.” “Exactly. You see it works perfectly.”

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  E. L. Herndon

“But we have no wild elephants in this country.”
Oh I see. So you believe that Sars Cov 2 no longer exists ? And it disappeared when ?
See John Burn-Murdoch for an explanation of the vaccine effect on the UK population with pretty, coloured graphs :
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1380512731456016385.html

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Of course Sars Cov 2 exists as part of our virusphere (which is incomprehensibly immense). I do distrust “pretty, coloured graphs” on a principle, and especially when someone who has a dog in the fight cooks them up. Statistics can be ginned up for anything, and are at best smoke and sizzle — but not the meat.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Of course Sars Cov 2 exists as part of our virusphere (which is incomprehensibly immense). I do distrust “pretty, coloured graphs” on a principle, and especially when someone who has a dog in the fight cooks them up. Statistics can be ginned up for anything, and are at best smoke and sizzle — but not the meat.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago
Reply to  E. L. Herndon

“But we have no wild elephants in this country.”
Oh I see. So you believe that Sars Cov 2 no longer exists ? And it disappeared when ?
See John Burn-Murdoch for an explanation of the vaccine effect on the UK population with pretty, coloured graphs :
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1380512731456016385.html

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago

Your last paragraph, as I read it, is exactly the same position as those who still think that lockdown prevented a worse rate of infection. Think of the man caught throwing tissues out a train window, and asked why. “It is to keep the wild elephants away.” “But we have no wild elephants in this country.” “Exactly. You see it works perfectly.”

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago

 No one ever suggested vaccines would stop all infection, though they do make it harder for the virus to infect us and hugely less likely that it will kill us.  Fit and well people were dying in large numbers from the first two strains. People talk about herd immunity without understanding what it means. For instance, herd immunity for polio can only be achieved by mass vaccination, if my memory serves me right, of eighty percent vaccination, which diminishes the pool of unvaccinated hosts to a manageable level, hence the seriousness of the MMR vaccine scare: It pushed levels of immunity below herd level, and children died. Swedish immigrants suffered disproportionately high levels of serious illness and death, not just elderly people, and the Swedish govt. enquiry did state that ‘earlier and more extensive pandemic action should have been taken.’ The way the virus is mutating [and no one could have safely predicted this] is towards more infectious and less dangerous strains, which we can, in time, live with, but the lockdown did buy us real time, and would have been more effective if it had been introduced earlier with test and trace in the early days, when this was possible
The Scandinavian stats I’m referring to are excess death rates. As you might be able to see, my views are evidence based and I also understand the basics of epidemiology, do you? 

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

Transmission. Depends on the variant.
I would say there was good evidence for reduction in transmission of the alpha variant early in 2021
Effect of vaccination on household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in England. N Engl J Med2021;385:759-60. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2107717 pmid:34161702
and
Effect of vaccination on transmission of covid-19: SARS-Cov-2. N Engl J Med2021;385:1718-20. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2106757 pmid:34496200
Less efficacious against delta :
The impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on alpha and delta variant transmission.Medrxiv2021.09.28.21264260 [Preprint]. doi:10.1101/2021.09.28.21264260
Good narrative review with decent references in the BMJ here :
What do we know about covid vaccines and preventing transmission?
https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o298
These vaccines were never designed to prevent infection, only reducing the chances of you getting really sick (and bunging up hospitals). The original trials make this clear that was the case because they weren’t human challenge trials.
The vaccines have been spectacularly successful at reducing the total numbers of really sick individuals thus allowing the lean and mean NHS to get on with other work.

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago

 No one ever suggested vaccines would stop all infection, though they do make it harder for the virus to infect us and hugely less likely that it will kill us.  Fit and well people were dying in large numbers from the first two strains. People talk about herd immunity without understanding what it means. For instance, herd immunity for polio can only be achieved by mass vaccination, if my memory serves me right, of eighty percent vaccination, which diminishes the pool of unvaccinated hosts to a manageable level, hence the seriousness of the MMR vaccine scare: It pushed levels of immunity below herd level, and children died. Swedish immigrants suffered disproportionately high levels of serious illness and death, not just elderly people, and the Swedish govt. enquiry did state that ‘earlier and more extensive pandemic action should have been taken.’ The way the virus is mutating [and no one could have safely predicted this] is towards more infectious and less dangerous strains, which we can, in time, live with, but the lockdown did buy us real time, and would have been more effective if it had been introduced earlier with test and trace in the early days, when this was possible
The Scandinavian stats I’m referring to are excess death rates. As you might be able to see, my views are evidence based and I also understand the basics of epidemiology, do you? 

Jeff Dudgeon
Jeff Dudgeon
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

Swedish excess deaths were amongst the lowest in Europe.

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Dudgeon

We can’t simply compare excess deaths, or lockdowns for that matter, without caveat. If you read the Swedish govt. enquiry, for instance, it states that what worked out not too badly for Sweden, could be very bad for other dissimilar countries. We’ve known since Victorian times that the two drivers of epidemics are poverty and overcrowding, we also know that Sweden has high social spending, relatively good housing, not much poverty. That means we can’t accurately compare Sweden with the UK for example, but we can compare it with the other Nordic countries, and we find that Swedish excess deaths were twice that of Norway and Denmark. If we look within Sweden [from the Swedish enquiry] we find that covid deaths were markedly higher amongst Sweden’s immigrant population, presumably because of poorer housing and relative poverty. It’s quite complex

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Dudgeon

We can’t simply compare excess deaths, or lockdowns for that matter, without caveat. If you read the Swedish govt. enquiry, for instance, it states that what worked out not too badly for Sweden, could be very bad for other dissimilar countries. We’ve known since Victorian times that the two drivers of epidemics are poverty and overcrowding, we also know that Sweden has high social spending, relatively good housing, not much poverty. That means we can’t accurately compare Sweden with the UK for example, but we can compare it with the other Nordic countries, and we find that Swedish excess deaths were twice that of Norway and Denmark. If we look within Sweden [from the Swedish enquiry] we find that covid deaths were markedly higher amongst Sweden’s immigrant population, presumably because of poorer housing and relative poverty. It’s quite complex

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

In the same way that we accept 3,000 road fatalities each year, with another 13,000 from car pollution. It looks as though two things are true: Sweden should have locked down sooner – and the rest of us should have lifted lock-downs earlier, not closed schools etc. Moreover you are repeating the endemic mistake of focusing only on covid deaths as the measure of harm – it looks certain that the pandemic reactions in the UK are directly responsible for on-going increased deaths from other causes (due to people staying away from hospital, Drs, diagnoses etc) – and for a huge increase in mental health problems, particularly amongst the young…… All to save a group of people who, harsh to say I know, whose mode age was very near the end of life (average years lost by a covid death, around 4): as such it stands as yet another way in which the boomer generation has lived very well, on the dime of the younger generations, who, for the first time in many generations can no longer expect to live as well as their parents.

Last edited 1 year ago by Dominic A
Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

As far as I can see, I stated a series of facts – obviously displeasing to a few people – do they care to make a counter-point?

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

We should have locked down earlier and got serious about test and trace when test and trace might have made a difference. That way, following other quickly locked down countries, we could have had shorter lockdowns and few deaths, as did New Zealand and South Korea. If you remember, at the height of the first and most lethal pre vaccine wave, 1400 people a week were dying, including young, fit people. It’s not true to say that pre vaccine covid only killed the chronically ill and elderly, and at that time, we didn’t have any clear idea how it affected children. The lockdowns didn’t prevent anyone from going to hospital or A& E, people stayed away because they were terrified of dying, people missed treatments because the NHS was over stretched, not because of lockdowns. In what way would telling people they were free to do as they liked, to not wear masks etc, protect their mental health? That would scare many people shitless.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

Thanks for the reply. “It’s not true to say that pre vaccine covid only killed the chronically ill and elderly” – true, which is why I never claimed otherwise. People stayed away because of excess fear and hyberbole – my brother is an A&E surgeon – he and colleagues were twiddling their thumbs, or furloughed for much of the pandemic because operations were cancelled out of what we know now was an excess of caution. I am a psychologist, and like my colleagues I am seeing a 2 – 5 x increase in referrals – we are not sure why, but covid over-reactions, a general culture of safetyism, seem likely. I notice just recently that new research indicates that parents should feed their infants peanuts in the early months as this has lead to a 77% decrease in allergies – which runs totally counter to their previous advice -‘peanuts are bad so don’t give them to your kids for 7 years’. When did we forget ‘whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger’, and replace it with ‘what-ever hurts you, in mind or body, is a bad thing to be avoided at all costs’?

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Pre vaccination, people stayed away from A&E out of a reasonable and inevitable fear of the virus. Post vaccines, the trade off was completely different. ‘An abundance of caution’ was the phrase on the lips of the govt. scientists and given the possible worst case scenario, how could they have reasonably responded otherwise? As for fear, I recall that the country began to shut down of its own accord, before the govt. imposed any lockdowns.

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Pre vaccination, people stayed away from A&E out of a reasonable and inevitable fear of the virus. Post vaccines, the trade off was completely different. ‘An abundance of caution’ was the phrase on the lips of the govt. scientists and given the possible worst case scenario, how could they have reasonably responded otherwise? As for fear, I recall that the country began to shut down of its own accord, before the govt. imposed any lockdowns.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

Thanks for the reply. “It’s not true to say that pre vaccine covid only killed the chronically ill and elderly” – true, which is why I never claimed otherwise. People stayed away because of excess fear and hyberbole – my brother is an A&E surgeon – he and colleagues were twiddling their thumbs, or furloughed for much of the pandemic because operations were cancelled out of what we know now was an excess of caution. I am a psychologist, and like my colleagues I am seeing a 2 – 5 x increase in referrals – we are not sure why, but covid over-reactions, a general culture of safetyism, seem likely. I notice just recently that new research indicates that parents should feed their infants peanuts in the early months as this has lead to a 77% decrease in allergies – which runs totally counter to their previous advice -‘peanuts are bad so don’t give them to your kids for 7 years’. When did we forget ‘whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger’, and replace it with ‘what-ever hurts you, in mind or body, is a bad thing to be avoided at all costs’?

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

As far as I can see, I stated a series of facts – obviously displeasing to a few people – do they care to make a counter-point?

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

We should have locked down earlier and got serious about test and trace when test and trace might have made a difference. That way, following other quickly locked down countries, we could have had shorter lockdowns and few deaths, as did New Zealand and South Korea. If you remember, at the height of the first and most lethal pre vaccine wave, 1400 people a week were dying, including young, fit people. It’s not true to say that pre vaccine covid only killed the chronically ill and elderly, and at that time, we didn’t have any clear idea how it affected children. The lockdowns didn’t prevent anyone from going to hospital or A& E, people stayed away because they were terrified of dying, people missed treatments because the NHS was over stretched, not because of lockdowns. In what way would telling people they were free to do as they liked, to not wear masks etc, protect their mental health? That would scare many people shitless.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

Nonsense by the time the so called vaccines arrived, the cull was almost complete. “Thanks be to God”.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

No it wasn’t because excess deaths continued.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Really? For how long and for how many (as proportion of the overall total) may I ask?

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

Covid 19 Actuaries Response Group.
For an easy to read comprehensive overview here :
https://covidactuaries.org/2022/09/04/a-summer-of-excess-deaths/
with links to the Continuous Mortality Investigation

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Many thanks.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Many thanks.

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

Covid 19 Actuaries Response Group.
For an easy to read comprehensive overview here :
https://covidactuaries.org/2022/09/04/a-summer-of-excess-deaths/
with links to the Continuous Mortality Investigation

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Really? For how long and for how many (as proportion of the overall total) may I ask?

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago

Vaccines stopped the first most lethal strain in its tracks. Meanwhile the virus mutated into more infectious but less lethal strains, but the vaccines still somewhat suppressed transmission and prevented most infected people from becoming seriously ill, and maybe dying. Never mind ‘thanks be to God.’ You talk as if you’re God, with your stupid use of the word ‘cull.’

Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
Elaine Giedrys-Leeper
1 year ago

No it wasn’t because excess deaths continued.

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago

Vaccines stopped the first most lethal strain in its tracks. Meanwhile the virus mutated into more infectious but less lethal strains, but the vaccines still somewhat suppressed transmission and prevented most infected people from becoming seriously ill, and maybe dying. Never mind ‘thanks be to God.’ You talk as if you’re God, with your stupid use of the word ‘cull.’

Louise Durnford
Louise Durnford
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

Slight problem with your post, because lockdown did not “buy” us time to develop an effective vaccine, since the vaccine is not effective at stopping transmission, or stopping infection.
The average age of those who died of Covid, rather than another respiratory disease that would most likely have taken them as well, is 83.
The vaccine did not “get us off the hook”. It gave the politicians an excuse to backtrack from a lockdown policy that they knew was going to cost everyone very dearly at the end, and did nothing to stop a virus that would just keep coming back until the population attained a percentage of herd immunity.
As for your assertion that Sweden had twice the death rates of Norway (almost all in care homes) you conveniently omit the fact that it is excess death rate figures that are more important ones, and on this, Sweden has the lowest rate, even Norway.
You really shouldn’t accuse Freddie of being a schoolboy when you don’t check the facts that he highlights.

Jeff Dudgeon
Jeff Dudgeon
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

Swedish excess deaths were amongst the lowest in Europe.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

In the same way that we accept 3,000 road fatalities each year, with another 13,000 from car pollution. It looks as though two things are true: Sweden should have locked down sooner – and the rest of us should have lifted lock-downs earlier, not closed schools etc. Moreover you are repeating the endemic mistake of focusing only on covid deaths as the measure of harm – it looks certain that the pandemic reactions in the UK are directly responsible for on-going increased deaths from other causes (due to people staying away from hospital, Drs, diagnoses etc) – and for a huge increase in mental health problems, particularly amongst the young…… All to save a group of people who, harsh to say I know, whose mode age was very near the end of life (average years lost by a covid death, around 4): as such it stands as yet another way in which the boomer generation has lived very well, on the dime of the younger generations, who, for the first time in many generations can no longer expect to live as well as their parents.

Last edited 1 year ago by Dominic A
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mccaully

Nonsense by the time the so called vaccines arrived, the cull was almost complete. “Thanks be to God”.

Doug Mccaully
Doug Mccaully
1 year ago

Some dodgy stats on display here, Sweden had twice the death rates of its Nordic neighbours. The official Swedish covid enquiry concluded that ‘earlier and more extensive pandemic action should have been taken.’ What the lockdown did was buy us time to develop an effective vaccine, which got us off the hook. On what planet is this choosing security over freedom? Schoolboy stuff.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago

Good summary of the position of ‘the minority’. As a member of ‘`the majority’ can I expand it a bit?

The key sentence is this:

in order to justify a policy as monumental as shutting down all of society for the first time in history, the de minimis outcome must be a certainty that fewer people died because of it.

It should be common ground that at the beginning no one had any idea, and even now there is still no clear outcome – the judgement of e.g. Sweden depends on which parameter you choose to look at. So the minority started out with their intuition, like everybody else. But, as Freddie Sayers says here, they are demanding that by default everybody should follow *their* intuition, until you can *prove* to their satisfaction that they are wrong. Indeed many contributors on this page are claiming that ‘it was obvious all along’ and loudly calling for imprisoning all those people who refused to respect their original hunches.

Here ‘the minority’ has a lot of overlap with the Brexiteers: People who have a strong gut feeling that the world is not the way they like it, demand that someone change the facts or apply a simple easy fix, and blame ‘the powerful’ for refusing to give them the world they want to live in. I have no doubt that we will see more of this group, and that they will be better organised and more bloody-minded next time. I just hope that we can manage to limit they damage this will cause.

Vote me down,

Last edited 1 year ago by Rasmus Fogh
John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Not me, I agree with every word you said. Nice one….

tom j
tom j
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

You talk loftily as if you’re the facts guy and the anti-lockdowners are the swivel eyed loons. But you also airily dismiss the data re Sweden and lockdowns, and (astonishingly) seem to claim that it was the intuitions of the anti-lockdown crowd that were imposed on the rest. I’m glad you then clarified what drove you mad, it was of course Brexit.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Unlike some anti-lockdowners I do not claim it was all obvious from the beginning. All I am saying is that nobody understood anything right at the start, and the conclusions are still not exactly clear even now. In that situation I’d say that lockdown was a reasonable decision, at the very least. I am not saying it was absolutely obvious it would give the best results – I am just disagreeing with Freddie Sayers who claims (for some reason) that as long as we do not have absolute proof of the contrary, we should follow the intuition of him and his friends as a matter of course. FWIW my reaction to Swedish policies at the time was that they might possibly end up giving a better result, but considering how little we knew about the disease, doing little or nothing to limit the risk was reckless gambling with people’s lives. I stand by that. In fact I see Tegnell and other like him in various health bureaucracies as proof that scientists tend to have too much faith in their models, and that ultimately policy is better handled by people more used to taking high-stakes decisions under uncertainty (like politicians?)

As for ‘airily dismiss the data re Sweden and lockdowns’ – remember at the start, when Swedish COVID death data were so much worse than e.g. Danish ones? The anti-lockdowners on Unherd were all so eager to explain that away with the excuse of Sweden’s population distribution, or holiday pattern or ‘Ah, but it will look differently in the long run’ … My conclusion is that there is not (going to be) a clear and obvious answer and we ought to wait a few years till epidemiology settles on a consensus. And refrain from unsupported triumphalism in the meantime.

Last edited 1 year ago by Rasmus Fogh
Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

I get frustrated with this myth that nobody had any idea what to do. We had studied pandemic respiratory illness in detail for nigh on a hundred years and we had developed highly reasoned policies for tackling them.
Nowhere has Freddie (or any credible lockdown sceptic) claimed that they have superior intuition, they just say that why on earth would we not follow the established policies? That would have been the rational thing to do, it is abandoning them in favour of an unproven and massively harmful experiment that was not.
And “it was a new virus” is not the glib answer. All pandemics are caused by “novel” viruses by definition – any strain of flu that causes a pandemic is novel in exactly the same way that this new strain of coronavirus was.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

Sure, we had a highly developed plan for flu. Unfortunately not all viruses are flu. Which is why I think Tegnell proved how scientists tend to stick with their current theory without considering that it might not apply in the new situation.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

As I said that’s not an answer. Quite right coronavirus is not flu, but there are many similarities so there has to be some really compelling reason to abandon the principals that underpinned flu pandemic planning.
No such compelling justification has been given. Logic, the precautionary principle and one hundred years of research all suggest we should have followed those principals.
Of course we should have been alert and continually feeding back real world data into those principals, but we didn’t do that, we just threw out the old plans, did something wholly unproven and previously rejected (for very good reasons) and then to all intents and purposes started to massage the data and the messaging to justify what had been done.
And Tegnell was of course right – Sweden’s excess deaths over the pandemic period are among the lowest in the democratic west (and excess deaths are all that matters – death from covid is no better or worse than death from anything else). The lockdowns didn’t “work” to reduce mortality and they came at massive cost.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stuart B
Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

So you are saying the at the precautionary principle should have caused us to do little or nothing in the face of a new and (potentially) highly deadly epidemic. That sounds unusual to me. Normally the precautionary principle is taken to mean that you should always do something to mitigate risks, in case they are really as bad you you think they might be.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

So you are saying the at the precautionary principle should have caused us to do little or nothing in the face of a new and (potentially) highly deadly epidemic. That sounds unusual to me. Normally the precautionary principle is taken to mean that you should always do something to mitigate risks, in case they are really as bad you you think they might be.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

As I said that’s not an answer. Quite right coronavirus is not flu, but there are many similarities so there has to be some really compelling reason to abandon the principals that underpinned flu pandemic planning.
No such compelling justification has been given. Logic, the precautionary principle and one hundred years of research all suggest we should have followed those principals.
Of course we should have been alert and continually feeding back real world data into those principals, but we didn’t do that, we just threw out the old plans, did something wholly unproven and previously rejected (for very good reasons) and then to all intents and purposes started to massage the data and the messaging to justify what had been done.
And Tegnell was of course right – Sweden’s excess deaths over the pandemic period are among the lowest in the democratic west (and excess deaths are all that matters – death from covid is no better or worse than death from anything else). The lockdowns didn’t “work” to reduce mortality and they came at massive cost.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stuart B
Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Stuart B

Sure, we had a highly developed plan for flu. Unfortunately not all viruses are flu. Which is why I think Tegnell proved how scientists tend to stick with their current theory without considering that it might not apply in the new situation.

Stuart B
Stuart B
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

I get frustrated with this myth that nobody had any idea what to do. We had studied pandemic respiratory illness in detail for nigh on a hundred years and we had developed highly reasoned policies for tackling them.
Nowhere has Freddie (or any credible lockdown sceptic) claimed that they have superior intuition, they just say that why on earth would we not follow the established policies? That would have been the rational thing to do, it is abandoning them in favour of an unproven and massively harmful experiment that was not.
And “it was a new virus” is not the glib answer. All pandemics are caused by “novel” viruses by definition – any strain of flu that causes a pandemic is novel in exactly the same way that this new strain of coronavirus was.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

I think his point about Brexit was that the Brexit Elite sold a vision of sunlit uplands that have failed to materialise but rather than accept that we get the full Norma Desmond “I’m still big, it’s the pictures that got small”.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Sadly it appears that Dominic Cummings was the greatest lockdown FREAK of them all!

Terrified by what he saw in Bergamo, he assumed it would happen in Tunbridge Wells. Simply pathetic!

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Unlike some anti-lockdowners I do not claim it was all obvious from the beginning. All I am saying is that nobody understood anything right at the start, and the conclusions are still not exactly clear even now. In that situation I’d say that lockdown was a reasonable decision, at the very least. I am not saying it was absolutely obvious it would give the best results – I am just disagreeing with Freddie Sayers who claims (for some reason) that as long as we do not have absolute proof of the contrary, we should follow the intuition of him and his friends as a matter of course. FWIW my reaction to Swedish policies at the time was that they might possibly end up giving a better result, but considering how little we knew about the disease, doing little or nothing to limit the risk was reckless gambling with people’s lives. I stand by that. In fact I see Tegnell and other like him in various health bureaucracies as proof that scientists tend to have too much faith in their models, and that ultimately policy is better handled by people more used to taking high-stakes decisions under uncertainty (like politicians?)

As for ‘airily dismiss the data re Sweden and lockdowns’ – remember at the start, when Swedish COVID death data were so much worse than e.g. Danish ones? The anti-lockdowners on Unherd were all so eager to explain that away with the excuse of Sweden’s population distribution, or holiday pattern or ‘Ah, but it will look differently in the long run’ … My conclusion is that there is not (going to be) a clear and obvious answer and we ought to wait a few years till epidemiology settles on a consensus. And refrain from unsupported triumphalism in the meantime.

Last edited 1 year ago by Rasmus Fogh
John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

I think his point about Brexit was that the Brexit Elite sold a vision of sunlit uplands that have failed to materialise but rather than accept that we get the full Norma Desmond “I’m still big, it’s the pictures that got small”.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Sadly it appears that Dominic Cummings was the greatest lockdown FREAK of them all!

Terrified by what he saw in Bergamo, he assumed it would happen in Tunbridge Wells. Simply pathetic!

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

I’m not entirely sure that the ‘less lockdown group’ aren’t more like Remainers, whilst the maximals are akin to Brexiteers. To explain: it seems to me that the fuller lockdown plans were not closely & clearly following the science, rather they were politicised, highly emotive worst-case interpretations, – superficially common sensical. The QUALY cost went from the usual £30,000 to £3,000,000 (ie to save a year of life from covid we spent the latter, for all other diseases, bad luck, you’ll only get the usual 30k spent to save you). As a Remainer, I think this is what the Brexiteers did/do. Both ‘maximals’ and Brexiteers are in the position of ‘knowing the cost of everything (thousands of excess deaths!; £350 million a week!) and the value of nothing’ (kids being educated in person, without masks; the billions we make a year because of being in the EU). I’m going to get down voted by both sides – bloodbath!

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Maybe, but there is a big difference. With Brexit, the consequences of staying in were pretty clear, it was only the consequences of Brexit that were wild speculation (not just on one side, of course). With COVID neither the cost of letting it rip and waiting for herd immunity nor the costs of lockdowns were anywhere near clear in advance.

I’d quite agree that the lockdown plans were not ‘following the science’, but that is because science could not tell you where to go. When there is huge uncertainty (and there was) the best science can give you is a range of scenarios, with likelihood attached,.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Maybe, but there is a big difference. With Brexit, the consequences of staying in were pretty clear, it was only the consequences of Brexit that were wild speculation (not just on one side, of course). With COVID neither the cost of letting it rip and waiting for herd immunity nor the costs of lockdowns were anywhere near clear in advance.

I’d quite agree that the lockdown plans were not ‘following the science’, but that is because science could not tell you where to go. When there is huge uncertainty (and there was) the best science can give you is a range of scenarios, with likelihood attached,.

Chris Hume
Chris Hume
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

But, as Freddie Sayers says here, they are demanding that by default everybody should follow *their* intuition, until you can *prove* to their satisfaction that they are wrong.

No, its incumbent on the person who wants to invest the government with the power to lock everyone in their house to come up with some sort of proof. If you want extreme measures you must produce convincing evidence and argument. To be opposed to locking down a whole country IS the default position.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Hume

Exactly. You are saying that the decault position should be to agree with you. I could argue that ‘the default position’ IS to try to protect people from a dangerous disease rather than keep the pubs open and let the disease rip – but let us just say that we disagree.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Hume

Exactly. You are saying that the decault position should be to agree with you. I could argue that ‘the default position’ IS to try to protect people from a dangerous disease rather than keep the pubs open and let the disease rip – but let us just say that we disagree.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Plenty of people ‘had an idea’. You were just not following what was going on. Too many people sitting slack jawed in front of MSM.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Not me, I agree with every word you said. Nice one….

tom j
tom j
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

You talk loftily as if you’re the facts guy and the anti-lockdowners are the swivel eyed loons. But you also airily dismiss the data re Sweden and lockdowns, and (astonishingly) seem to claim that it was the intuitions of the anti-lockdown crowd that were imposed on the rest. I’m glad you then clarified what drove you mad, it was of course Brexit.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

I’m not entirely sure that the ‘less lockdown group’ aren’t more like Remainers, whilst the maximals are akin to Brexiteers. To explain: it seems to me that the fuller lockdown plans were not closely & clearly following the science, rather they were politicised, highly emotive worst-case interpretations, – superficially common sensical. The QUALY cost went from the usual £30,000 to £3,000,000 (ie to save a year of life from covid we spent the latter, for all other diseases, bad luck, you’ll only get the usual 30k spent to save you). As a Remainer, I think this is what the Brexiteers did/do. Both ‘maximals’ and Brexiteers are in the position of ‘knowing the cost of everything (thousands of excess deaths!; £350 million a week!) and the value of nothing’ (kids being educated in person, without masks; the billions we make a year because of being in the EU). I’m going to get down voted by both sides – bloodbath!

Chris Hume
Chris Hume
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

But, as Freddie Sayers says here, they are demanding that by default everybody should follow *their* intuition, until you can *prove* to their satisfaction that they are wrong.

No, its incumbent on the person who wants to invest the government with the power to lock everyone in their house to come up with some sort of proof. If you want extreme measures you must produce convincing evidence and argument. To be opposed to locking down a whole country IS the default position.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 year ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Plenty of people ‘had an idea’. You were just not following what was going on. Too many people sitting slack jawed in front of MSM.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago

Good summary of the position of ‘the minority’. As a member of ‘`the majority’ can I expand it a bit?

The key sentence is this:

in order to justify a policy as monumental as shutting down all of society for the first time in history, the de minimis outcome must be a certainty that fewer people died because of it.

It should be common ground that at the beginning no one had any idea, and even now there is still no clear outcome – the judgement of e.g. Sweden depends on which parameter you choose to look at. So the minority started out with their intuition, like everybody else. But, as Freddie Sayers says here, they are demanding that by default everybody should follow *their* intuition, until you can *prove* to their satisfaction that they are wrong. Indeed many contributors on this page are claiming that ‘it was obvious all along’ and loudly calling for imprisoning all those people who refused to respect their original hunches.

Here ‘the minority’ has a lot of overlap with the Brexiteers: People who have a strong gut feeling that the world is not the way they like it, demand that someone change the facts or apply a simple easy fix, and blame ‘the powerful’ for refusing to give them the world they want to live in. I have no doubt that we will see more of this group, and that they will be better organised and more bloody-minded next time. I just hope that we can manage to limit they damage this will cause.

Vote me down,

Last edited 1 year ago by Rasmus Fogh
Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

There were some wonderful and unexpected benefits to lockdowns. People suddenly rediscovering nature, baking, DIY, gardening and all manner of interests during that amazing quiet spring – the lasting results of this was many reconnecting with the things that are important in life, the proof of this is the large number of folks retiring early. Home working was something that was always going to happen, but was propelled forward a generation, with many now not facing the evils of the commute.

Prashant Kotak
Prashant Kotak
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The sheer joy of banana bread, eh?

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You people relied on delivery drivers – who probably lived in cramped high rise flats without gardens – to bring you your organic wellness crud.

Last edited 1 year ago by Richard Craven
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Watch out! He is a disciple of “ Rubber Johnny” Holland, late of this Parish.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago

Haha! I do wonder what happened to Rubber.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Perhaps I should also mention Mr Johnny Murray who has also recently arrived in this Parish?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Perhaps I should also mention Mr Johnny Murray who has also recently arrived in this Parish?

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago

Haha! I do wonder what happened to Rubber.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Not at all, I ‘braved’ the supermarket. Well, that turned out to be a joyous experience – no old people or children in the way, defined up and down channels with plenty of space and no queues at the till. Bring it back I say.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Careful, your psychopathy is showing.

Peadar Laighléis
Peadar Laighléis
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Don’t rise to the bait, but there are people out there that had a good lockdown (or should that be plural), mainly inhabitants of brighter locations and very much with guaranteed incomes. Some of these would nearly want to make it an annual event at the first appearance of the winter ‘flu.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Mainly those on ridiculously generous State Pensions, who revelled in a lifetime of sloth and ignorance.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago

I know. In calling Robbie a psychopath, I was responding to his comment about “no old people or children in the way”‘ which seems to me to betray a want of empathy.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

To suppress my inner psycho I have to shop really early and not weekends, surely one can empathise with that? Even then you’ve got the pickers jamming up the isles for home delivery orders. Happy days :o)

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

To suppress my inner psycho I have to shop really early and not weekends, surely one can empathise with that? Even then you’ve got the pickers jamming up the isles for home delivery orders. Happy days :o)

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Mainly those on ridiculously generous State Pensions, who revelled in a lifetime of sloth and ignorance.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago

I know. In calling Robbie a psychopath, I was responding to his comment about “no old people or children in the way”‘ which seems to me to betray a want of empathy.

Peadar Laighléis
Peadar Laighléis
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Don’t rise to the bait, but there are people out there that had a good lockdown (or should that be plural), mainly inhabitants of brighter locations and very much with guaranteed incomes. Some of these would nearly want to make it an annual event at the first appearance of the winter ‘flu.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Careful, your psychopathy is showing.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Watch out! He is a disciple of “ Rubber Johnny” Holland, late of this Parish.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Not at all, I ‘braved’ the supermarket. Well, that turned out to be a joyous experience – no old people or children in the way, defined up and down channels with plenty of space and no queues at the till. Bring it back I say.

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

What a terrifying comment… I hear some people discover a welcome life-changing spirituality in prison, too – and yet that does not argue we should all give prison a try.
All the welcome benefits you describe that accrued to the privileged few who enjoyed lockdown were available to them before lockdown, if they’d just made the voluntary choice to take life a little easier. No reason at all to destroy jobs, capital investment, freedoms, etc. just so the laptop class could ‘rediscover nature, baking, DIY, gardening.’

Last edited 1 year ago by Kirk Susong
Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Kirk Susong

if they’d just made the voluntary choice to take life a little easier.

This is true, however people don’t, do they? Lockdown, especially the first one, proved to be a big wake up call to many and the lasting legacy was forgoing the daily grind and a drop in income for an improved quality of life.
This will of course land on cynical and grumpy ground, however, those people should then speculate as to the results of the survey.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Kirk Susong

if they’d just made the voluntary choice to take life a little easier.

This is true, however people don’t, do they? Lockdown, especially the first one, proved to be a big wake up call to many and the lasting legacy was forgoing the daily grind and a drop in income for an improved quality of life.
This will of course land on cynical and grumpy ground, however, those people should then speculate as to the results of the survey.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Jolly good. Never mind the children whose lives were destroyed.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

I take it the respondents of the poll have children yet don’t subscribe to that kind of hysteria.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Worth checking the Methodology – sounds like Prof Doom’s model.
As for the data analysts –
https://www.focaldata.com/about-us
Try GP-CHAT – it’s woke, but to find out you need to ask the right questions 😉
Methodology noteFocaldata specialises in mapping opinion poll data onto smaller geographic areas, using a technique known as MRP, or Multilevel Regression with Post-stratification. For this study we collected data from 10,009 respondents between 12th and 16th December 2022 using Focaldata’s online platform.
While this does not yield enough observations in individual constituencies to treat the data as separate constituency polls, we can look for patterns in responses across constituencies that have similar characteristics, and then work out the implications of those patterns for each constituency.
This technique of “multilevel regression and post-stratification” or MRP is the same approach used by Focaldata to predict Vote Intention in Westminster constituencies. Focaldata’s MRP model uses age, gender, education, working status, VoteGE2019, referendum vote, religion and housing tenure as individual-level predictors in the model. It also uses population density, % born in the UK, and % gross income median. We used a Bayesian exploded logit model, which is fit using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with the open-source software Stan.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Worth checking the Methodology – sounds like Prof Doom’s model.
As for the data analysts –
https://www.focaldata.com/about-us
Try GP-CHAT – it’s woke, but to find out you need to ask the right questions 😉
Methodology noteFocaldata specialises in mapping opinion poll data onto smaller geographic areas, using a technique known as MRP, or Multilevel Regression with Post-stratification. For this study we collected data from 10,009 respondents between 12th and 16th December 2022 using Focaldata’s online platform.
While this does not yield enough observations in individual constituencies to treat the data as separate constituency polls, we can look for patterns in responses across constituencies that have similar characteristics, and then work out the implications of those patterns for each constituency.
This technique of “multilevel regression and post-stratification” or MRP is the same approach used by Focaldata to predict Vote Intention in Westminster constituencies. Focaldata’s MRP model uses age, gender, education, working status, VoteGE2019, referendum vote, religion and housing tenure as individual-level predictors in the model. It also uses population density, % born in the UK, and % gross income median. We used a Bayesian exploded logit model, which is fit using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with the open-source software Stan.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

I agree that in many ways, the lockdown will have had the most enduring and unfortunate effect on the children of the poor, whose education and socialization, at risk before the “pandemic”, has now been blighted. That won’t be undone in a hurry.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  E. L. Herndon

But it will make for a less pliant generation to come, AND I suspect they’l cope far better with the possible worst case scenario of Net Zero/meets lockdown/meets QE effects/meets low interest rate consequences/meets deficit spending governments. Mind you I’m not sure I’d like to be on the receiving end of anything they feel inclined to dish out IF the worst case happens.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  E. L. Herndon

But it will make for a less pliant generation to come, AND I suspect they’l cope far better with the possible worst case scenario of Net Zero/meets lockdown/meets QE effects/meets low interest rate consequences/meets deficit spending governments. Mind you I’m not sure I’d like to be on the receiving end of anything they feel inclined to dish out IF the worst case happens.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

I take it the respondents of the poll have children yet don’t subscribe to that kind of hysteria.

E. L. Herndon
E. L. Herndon
1 year ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

I agree that in many ways, the lockdown will have had the most enduring and unfortunate effect on the children of the poor, whose education and socialization, at risk before the “pandemic”, has now been blighted. That won’t be undone in a hurry.

Prashant Kotak
Prashant Kotak
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The sheer joy of banana bread, eh?

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

You people relied on delivery drivers – who probably lived in cramped high rise flats without gardens – to bring you your organic wellness crud.

Last edited 1 year ago by Richard Craven
Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

What a terrifying comment… I hear some people discover a welcome life-changing spirituality in prison, too – and yet that does not argue we should all give prison a try.
All the welcome benefits you describe that accrued to the privileged few who enjoyed lockdown were available to them before lockdown, if they’d just made the voluntary choice to take life a little easier. No reason at all to destroy jobs, capital investment, freedoms, etc. just so the laptop class could ‘rediscover nature, baking, DIY, gardening.’

Last edited 1 year ago by Kirk Susong
Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Jolly good. Never mind the children whose lives were destroyed.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

There were some wonderful and unexpected benefits to lockdowns. People suddenly rediscovering nature, baking, DIY, gardening and all manner of interests during that amazing quiet spring – the lasting results of this was many reconnecting with the things that are important in life, the proof of this is the large number of folks retiring early. Home working was something that was always going to happen, but was propelled forward a generation, with many now not facing the evils of the commute.